To all of you climate change deniers

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Personal feelings..The UN is a joke. Global warming/Climate change is a self created, growing industry the perpetuates myths and models of doom for its own benefit.

The earths climate hsa cycled multiple times and believe it or not, this also occurred even before humans used tools.
 
Stevenson said:
Did you even read the article, DaLincoln?

Thank you, though, for proving my point.
Click to expand...

Yes, i did read the article. To be frank, I see nothing new in the piece. These guys cry "Wolf" so often, even if there was a legitimate cause for immediate concern, I would have a hard time paying attention to the warning.

Please tell me, you seem to believe there is game changing information in this...share with me what I have missed..
 
Wow! "it's increasingly likely that the heating trend could be irreversible"

That is astonishing! I guess this means man has indeed interrupted the Interglacial cycle that has been going on for all of discernible history. I sure would like to see the salient data that toggled the change. The last time I looked our CO2 levels were about the same as every other cycle,
perhaps a little less than some.

This is amazing news.

400000yearslarge.gif
 
MarAzul said:
Wow! "it's increasingly likely that the heating trend could be irreversible"

That is astonishing! I guess this means man has indeed interrupted the Interglacial cycle that has been going on for all of discernible history. I sure would like to see the salient data that toggled the change. The last time I looked our CO2 levels were about the same as every other cycle,
perhaps a little less than some.

This is amazing news.

400000yearslarge.gif
Click to expand...

The thing about "the global temperature change is natural" is that we should be well into a cooling period by now, but we aren't. Look at how large those peaks are, and look at how long our current peak is at.

And yes, the planet will survive more global warming, but human society probably won't.
 
Eastoff said:
The thing about "the global temperature change is natural" is that we should be well into a cooling period by now, but we aren't. Look at how large those peaks are, and look at how long our current peak is at.

And yes, the planet will survive more global warming, but human society probably won't.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. What do we do?
 
Eastoff said:
See the original post, or basically, heavily encourage green energies and punish unnecessary pollution.
Click to expand...

But the CO2 levels are lower than the prior cycles? And then there is the small thing of if we stopped all CO2 pollution here in the US tomorrow, it wouldn't change much for the World.

We are not even close to the bad guy if there is one.
 
MarAzul said:
But the CO2 levels are lower than the prior cycles? And then there is the small thing of if we stopped all CO2 pollution here in the US tomorrow, it wouldn't change much for the World.

We are not even close to the bad guy if there is one.
Click to expand...

Push the green technology on the rest of the world too. I get your point that it seems dauntless, but that doesn't mean do nothing.
 
Stevenson said:
Draft Of Upcoming U.N. Climate Change Report Presents Stark View Of The Future As Climate Change Rages On.

What is wrong with you? Do you not like science, or do you not "believe" in it, is the U.N. not legitimate to you, or what? I really, really don't get what there is to debate at this point, other than how to fix this huge problem.
Click to expand...

The IPCC is a political body, not a scientific one. There are a number of scientists who participated in the IPCC drafts and who say the alarmism is not warranted. Why do you believe one group of scientists over another?

Your article mentions one, John Christy. He's the guy who actually collects the temperature data that the others massage until there's something to "fear."

Christy is the Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.

EG-AD687A_McNid_G_20140220095703.jpg


Why would you trust the predictions (red) of the IPCC?
 
MarAzul said:
What green technology?
Click to expand...

More electric vehicles when possible, and less coal burning plants to list the first that come to mind. More efficient stuff too. PS this is probably my last response for the day, so I'm not dodging if you ask follow ups.
 
Eastoff said:
More electric vehicles when possible, and less coal burning plants to list the first that come to mind. More efficient stuff too. PS this is probably my last response for the day, so I'm not dodging if you ask follow ups.
Click to expand...

The originator of my company's formula had a peer he would write to for years. There was a folder that had communication back and forth. It was dated around 1960-65

Long story short, his peer was head of hydrogen power. He was close and had a letter explaining he feared something bad was going to happen to him.

Two months after that letter was mailed to our guy, his peer disappeared
 
Eastoff said:
More electric vehicles when possible, and less coal burning plants to list the first that come to mind. More efficient stuff too. PS this is probably my last response for the day, so I'm not dodging if you ask follow ups.
Click to expand...

I was hoping you would say, push our Nuclear technology. We have that down very well with the US Navy proving it out for 60 years now.

Obama is already shutting down the coal plants as if that really will help, but the fact is we will just sell the coal to China with a net zero change.
 
MarAzul said:
I was hoping you would say, push our Nuclear technology. We have that down very well with the US Navy proving it out for 60 years now.
Click to expand...

Yes, but what happens when the Navy pier disappears?

barfo
 
I'll believe it's a crisis when those who tell me it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis.
 
MarAzul said:
I was hoping you would say, push our Nuclear technology. We have that down very well with the US Navy proving it out for 60 years now.

Obama is already shutting down the coal plants as if that really will help, but the fact is we will just sell the coal to China with a net zero change.
Click to expand...

I'm still not sold on Nuclear power. It has the potential to be much, much more efficient. Right now it's a fancy steam engine, when they could be harnessing the radiation itself.

But I digress, Nuclear waste still lacks a safe place to be stored. Additionally, but less so, I'm concerned about plant safety. The fukushima reactor is still leaking into the ground water, unless that ice wall is complete and functioning. But if we get to the point where we truly are desperate, I'd be okay with nuclear power.
 
Eastoff said:
I'm still not sold on Nuclear power. It has the potential to be much, much more efficient. Right now it's a fancy steam engine, when they could be harnessing the radiation itself.

But I digress, Nuclear waste still lacks a safe place to be stored. Additionally, but less so, I'm concerned about plant safety. The fukushima reactor is still leaking into the ground water, unless that ice wall is complete and functioning. But if we get to the point where we truly are desperate, I'd be okay with nuclear power.
Click to expand...

Denny says that nuclear stuff in Japan is all BS. Japanese people skin is naturally yellow like that and the increased radiation levels are from previous Godzilla attacks.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Denny says that nuclear stuff in Japan is all BS. Japanese people skin is naturally yellow like that and the increased radiation levels are from previous Godzilla attacks.
Click to expand...

Intensity is proportional to the inverse square of the distance. That is, you get 1/4 the radiation effect as you get 2x further away. At 5000 miles away, it's effect is 1/(5000*5000) what it would be 1 mile away.

The reason they didn't just bury Fukushima in concrete (and be done with it) is that they're trying to recover the land for future generations' use.
 
Eastoff said:
I'm still not sold on Nuclear power. It has the potential to be much, much more efficient. Right now it's a fancy steam engine, when they could be harnessing the radiation itself.

But I digress, Nuclear waste still lacks a safe place to be stored. Additionally, but less so, I'm concerned about plant safety. The fukushima reactor is still leaking into the ground water, unless that ice wall is complete and functioning. But if we get to the point where we truly are desperate, I'd be okay with nuclear power.
Click to expand...


The Japanese made very strange decisions with their implementation of Nuclear power. I worked with them (and others) to make their banks failsafe. We called it 747 proof, where a processing center would not go down,
it would be immediately succeeded by another and then another on another Island near instantly. Very strange why the backup system for the Nuclear plants where designed so lacking in failsafe capacity. There is no reason a cooling system should be permitted to fail without a backup system taking over. Earthquakes, Tsunami or not. If the plant became the epicenter for a volcanic eruption, a sister to Fuji, then perhaps. But hell, that would be about the same level disaster as the plant melt down.
 
MarAzul said:
The Japanese made very strange decisions with their implementation of Nuclear power. I worked with them (and others) to make their banks failsafe. We called it 747 proof, where a processing center would not go down,
it would be immediately succeeded by another and then another on another Island near instantly. Very strange why the backup system for the Nuclear plants where designed so lacking in failsafe capacity. There is no reason a cooling system should be permitted to fail without a backup system taking over. Earthquakes, Tsunami or not. If the plant became the epicenter for a volcanic eruption, a sister to Fuji, then perhaps. But hell, that would be about the same level disaster as the plant melt down.
Click to expand...

The tsunami was several orders of magnitude more a disaster than the nuclear plant problems.

It destroyed many square miles of cities and towns and farmland. It killed nearly 19,000 people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster_casualties
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Denny Crane
Meet the New Climate Deniers
Replies
13
Views
1K
Denny Crane
Denny Crane
mobes23
Climate change?
Replies
12
Views
1K
huevonkiller
huevonkiller
PapaG
Obama: No time for 'flat-earth society' on climate change
2
Replies
47
Views
1K
ant
ant
BigGameDamian
Politics Haley: 'President Trump believes the climate is changing'
Replies
1
Views
293
julius
julius
SlyPokerDog
Billion-dollar climate denial network exposed
Replies
10
Views
555
PapaG
PapaG

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top