Those crazy "Global Warming" Nuts.

Where does the energy come from to produce the electricity to power electric cars?

Perhaps electric cars will reduce the smog but the same amount of energy will be produced somewhere else and the pollution as well.

Its just a trade off.
 

grahamg said:
Yes, but as I keep saying what have you or anyone else lost if the climate scientist have it all wrong?

If you can just put aside your worries or prejudice against climate scientists (why would they be any worse than any other scientist, and their work if published is subjected to "peer review" essentially other scientists criticising their work). There is nothing truer that untrammeled use of resources which are limited, such as fossil has to end somewhere, one day it will come when there isn't a piece of coal or a barrel of oil to be had, so why not take a "precautionary response" and limit their use as much as is feasible "just in case" :confused: ?
Click to expand...

Because the economy would tank. Let's all go back to the horse and carriage.
 
Solar, Wind, and Tidal energy are the ways of the future. Nuclear energy too, although I have strong safety reservations about that. Fossil fuels need to be completely phased out before the middle of this century, or this planet and its inhabitants will be in deep trouble.
 

SpicyTweed said:
Solar, Wind, and Tidal energy are the ways of the future. Nuclear energy too, although I have strong safety reservations about that. Fossil fuels need to be completely phased out before the middle of this century, or this planet and its inhabitants will be in deep trouble.
Click to expand...

Fossil fuels will not be completely phased out without nuclear energy taking a dominant role. Those alternatives you quoted will not fill the need for the energy required to maintain a healthy economy.

Those alternatives you quote need manufacturing capabilities to sustain them. Where is the energy going to come from and what does that energy cost.
 
All gone in 100 years?

garyt1957 said:
Don M wrote:
"Yup, the vast majority of people have little concern for the future generations...if it doesn't directly affect them, it's nothing to get excited about. Even worse, are those who accept nonsense from people like this as being the truth."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/rush-limb...141627581.html


gary1957

"Or even listen to climatologists who've been caught fudging the numbers many times over."


Grahamg wrote:

"Yes, but as I keep saying what have you or anyone else lost if the climate scientist have it all wrong?

If you can just put aside your worries or prejudice against climate scientists (why would they be any worse than any other scientist, and their work if published is subjected to "peer review" essentially other scientists criticising their work). There is nothing truer that untrammeled use of resources which are limited, such as fossil has to end somewhere, one day it will come when there isn't a piece of coal or a barrel of oil to be had, so why not take a "precautionary response" and limit their use as much as is feasible "just in case"" :confused: ?

gary1957 wrote:

"Because the economy would tank. Let's all go back to the horse and carriage."
Click to expand...


Even the most blinkered "Kentucky miner" who would lose his job as a result of the restrictions placed upon fossil fuel use is not going to wish to see the planet ruined for their children's generation, or grandchildren's generation, or however long it takes. We've all heard that mankind will destroy itself, and maybe we will, but lets not force those who wish to prevent one way of doing so arrive sooner than absolutely unavoidable, if there are viable alternatives being put forward?

You don't want that I'm sure, and my dear late father used to say how much he enjoyed farming with his carthorse as a young man :) , and man made climate change made sense to him because of changes in nature he'd seen over his long lifetime, and the arguments being put forward by both his fellow farmers and "experts".
 
grahamg said:
Even the most blinkered "Kentucky miner" who would lose his job as a result of the restrictions placed upon fossil fuel use is not going to wish to see the planet ruined for their children's generation, or grandchildren's generation, or however long it takes. We've all heard that mankind will destroy itself, and maybe we will, but lets not force those who wish to prevent one way of doing so arrive sooner than absolutely unavoidable, if there are viable alternatives being put forward?

".
Click to expand...
And that's just it, there are no VIABLE alternatives available and won't be in my lifetime. We will replace fossil fuels somewhere down the road and there's certainly good reason to search for replacements but it's not happening anytime soon.
 
Precautionary principle

garyt1957 said:
Grahamg wrote:
"Even the most blinkered "Kentucky miner" who would lose his job as a result of the restrictions placed upon fossil fuel use is not going to wish to see the planet ruined for their children's generation, or grandchildren's generation, or however long it takes. We've all heard that mankind will destroy itself, and maybe we will, but lets not force those who wish to prevent one way of doing so arrive sooner than absolutely unavoidable, if there are viable alternatives being put forward?"

Gary1957 wrote:

"And that's just it, there are no VIABLE alternatives available and won't be in my lifetime. We will replace fossil fuels somewhere down the road and there's certainly good reason to search for replacements but it's not happening anytime soon."
Click to expand...


No one has all the answers on this one I'm sure, so it is a matter of who or what you put your faith in :confused: . It could be simply my personality where I'd maybe choose to be more cautious than others, such as yourself, who might be more of a risk taker perhaps (?).

On one of our UK tv news channels this morning a discussion on the impact of recent storms in the USA took place, and one reputable journalist Steve Richards said those who deny climate change have little room for manoeuvre because after they've provided immediate aid to those in stricken areas, or help to rebuild, they have no possible "solutions" to offer anyone, and that he believed would become an issue as the days go by.
 
grahamg said:
No one has all the answers on this one I'm sure, so it is a matter of who or what you put your faith in :confused: . It could be simply my personality where I'd maybe choose to be more cautious than others, such as yourself, who might be more of a risk taker perhaps (?).

On one of our UK tv news channels this morning a discussion on the impact of recent storms in the USA took place, and one reputable journalist Steve Richards said those who deny climate change have little room for manoeuvre because after they've provided immediate aid to those in stricken areas, or help to rebuild, they have no possible "solutions" to offer anyone, and that he believed would become an issue as the days go by.
Click to expand...

I wish for once people would get it right. It's not a question of deny. It's a question of how much are humans contributing compared to what would happen if they weren't here.

There's no denying that the Earth is warming naturally. It has been going on for centuries. Right where I am sitting was a glacier that was about a mile high and melted and formed part of the Great Lakes. I am on the shore of Lake Superior.

I am a skeptic at all times because I want scientific explanations that are proven.

Some people believe it because the government says it is so.

The one thing I hate about the proponents of the global warming theory is the hype. If we don't do something right away we are doomed and we are already past the tipping point. Pure unadulterated b.s.
 
Camper6 said:
I am a skeptic at all times because I want scientific explanations that are proven. QUOTE]

Here's a pretty good summary of how/why things are warming up. This is from CNN, but if you are willing to spend a little time reviewing the data at NASA, NOAA, and any number of other reliable sources, you will see that most of them are saying the same thing. But first, you have to acknowledge that global events may Not all be viewable from your front yard.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/18/world/2016-hottest-year/index.html
Click to expand...
 
Don M. said:
Camper6 said:
I am a skeptic at all times because I want scientific explanations that are proven. QUOTE]

Here's a pretty good summary of how/why things are warming up. This is from CNN, but if you are willing to spend a little time reviewing the data at NASA, NOAA, and any number of other reliable sources, you will see that most of them are saying the same thing. But first, you have to acknowledge that global events may Not all be viewable from your front yard.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/18/world/2016-hottest-year/index.html
Click to expand...


O.K. Don here's another thing that bugs me. Who is the official source. The links you gave me are sometimes in conflict with one another.

What about the I.P.C.C.. Somewhere along the line one official source has to be the leader. We can't be jumping all over the place. And you and me can trade websites forever. There are all kinds of websites that counter your websites.

What I do is observe on my own. Where I live. I have the statistics for the last 100 years. The temperature hasn't changed one degree. In fact it has gotten cooler.

Those dramatic graphs don't cut it for me. They exaggerate the axis to make them look spectacular.

The proponents of AGW are not doing themselves any favors by promoting b.s.


I doubt very much that us puny humans have the ability to alter the worlds temperature to any significant degree. If we could, we could stop destructive hurricanes and earthquakes.

The Earth warmed up all by itself without any input from humans.

By the way. Please don't give me CNN as a source. They are not a scientific source and they are hopelessly biased. Completely hopeless.
Click to expand...
 
Camper6 said:
Don M. said:
O.K. Don here's another thing that bugs me. Who is the official source. The links you gave me are sometimes in conflict with one another.

What about the I.P.C.C.. Somewhere along the line one official source has to be the leader. We can't be jumping all over the place. And you and me can trade websites forever. There are all kinds of websites that counter your websites.

What I do is observe on my own. Where I live. I have the statistics for the last 100 years. The temperature hasn't changed one degree. In fact it has gotten cooler.

Those dramatic graphs don't cut it for me. They exaggerate the axis to make them look spectacular.

The proponents of AGW are not doing themselves any favors by promoting b.s.


I doubt very much that us puny humans have the ability to alter the worlds temperature to any significant degree. If we could, we could stop destructive hurricanes and earthquakes.

The Earth warmed up all by itself without any input from humans.

By the way. Please don't give me CNN as a source. They are not a scientific source and they are hopelessly biased. Completely hopeless.
Click to expand...

We have science on our side Camper.

[video]http://www.ucsusa.org/scientists-agree-global-warming-happening-humans-primary-cause#.WbXAMcZGnIU[/video]

You on the other hand have got the idiots that believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old and that all our troubles are because some dude ate a piece of fruit on your side.
Click to expand...
 
Trade said:
Camper6 said:
We have science on our side Camper.

[video]http://www.ucsusa.org/scientists-agree-global-warming-happening-humans-primary-cause#.WbXAMcZGnIU[/video]

You on the other hand have got the idiots that believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old and that all our troubles are because some dude ate a piece of fruit on your side.
Click to expand...

That is not a scientific site by a long shot.

I don't believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

From your link.
The first paragraph.

The evidence is overwhelming. Different records show that the Earth is warming fast, and that all the heat-trapping emissions we release into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels is changing our climate.
Click to expand...

No. The evidence is not overwhelming.

It's a theory that it's warming fast. That kind of statement is just pure b.s.

Do me a favor. Check the historical temperature where you live.

How much of an increase have you seen in 100 years? From all the hype you would think that it's 8 or 9 degrees. It isn't. It's well within historical norms.

100% and 97% huh.

It only takes one. Like Gallilleo. Notice they are asking for a donation. Have you sent money in yet?
Click to expand...
 
Camper6 said:
Do me a favor. Check the historical temperature where you live.
Click to expand...

I lived in Central Florida from the time I was born (1947) until 2014.

When I was a kid we used to get about a half a dozen freezes every year. I can remember sitting in class at Largo High School in the early 60's and watching snow flurries coming down outside the widow. But anymore freezes hardly ever happen. Right now I have three very productive mature citrus trees in my backyard and that's here in Mobile Alabama. That would have been unheard of just a couple of decades ago. All kinds of vegetation and wildlife have been extending their ranges farther and farther north during the past few decades. And those plants and animals are not doing that because they are listening to Al Gore.
 
Trade said:
I lived in Central Florida from the time I was born (1947) until 2014.

When I was a kid we used to get about a half a dozen freezes every year. I can remember sitting in class at Largo High School in the early 60's and watching snow flurries coming down outside the widow. But anymore freezes hardly ever happen. Right now I have three very productive mature citrus trees in my backyard and that's here in Mobile Alabama. That would have been unheard of just a couple of decades ago. All kinds of vegetation and wildlife have been extending their ranges farther and farther north during the past few decades. And those plants and animals are not doing that because they are listening to Al Gore.
Click to expand...


So I tell you what Camper. I'm gonna go with the smart people on this one. You are free to stick with the dummies.

 
grahamg said:
No one has all the answers on this one I'm sure, so it is a matter of who or what you put your faith in :confused: . It could be simply my personality where I'd maybe choose to be more cautious than others, such as yourself, who might be more of a risk taker perhaps (?).

On one of our UK tv news channels this morning a discussion on the impact of recent storms in the USA took place, and one reputable journalist Steve Richards said those who deny climate change have little room for manoeuvre because after they've provided immediate aid to those in stricken areas, or help to rebuild, they have no possible "solutions" to offer anyone, and that he believed would become an issue as the days go by.
Click to expand...
And while the warning signs are writ large over US and Central America, our PM is trying to bully a local electricity provider into extending the working life of an old coal fired generator for a further 5 years with the added inducement of heavy taxpayer input. What does the planet have to do to convince some people that a reduction in green house gases is prudent policy.
 
Trade said:
I lived in Central Florida from the time I was born (1947) until 2014.

When I was a kid we used to get about a half a dozen freezes every year. I can remember sitting in class at Largo High School in the early 60's and watching snow flurries coming down outside the widow. But anymore freezes hardly ever happen. Right now I have three very productive mature citrus trees in my backyard and that's here in Mobile Alabama. That would have been unheard of just a couple of decades ago. All kinds of vegetation and wildlife have been extending their ranges farther and farther north during the past few decades. And those plants and animals are not doing that because they are listening to Al Gore.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but your memory of childhood days isn't scientific enough for me. That's just hearsay evidence.

There isn't an adult around that can't relate a story about how tough things were when they were in school.

I want actual statistics. How much has the temperature increased from a reliable weather data source?

You know those citrus trees you are citing? Well it's a well known fact that you can plant species of trees that will adapt to a different zone.

Try planting the seeds and see if they survive. I was taught that in high school.
 
Trade said:
I lived in Central Florida from the time I was born (1947) until 2014.

When I was a kid we used to get about a half a dozen freezes every year. I can remember sitting in class at Largo High School in the early 60's and watching snow flurries coming down outside the widow. But anymore freezes hardly ever happen. Right now I have three very productive mature citrus trees in my backyard and that's here in Mobile Alabama. That would have been unheard of just a couple of decades ago. All kinds of vegetation and wildlife have been extending their ranges farther and farther north during the past few decades. And those plants and animals are not doing that because they are listening to Al Gore.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but your memory of childhood days isn't scientific enough for me. That's just hearsay evidence.

There isn't an adult around that can't relate a story about how tough things were when they were in school.

I want actual statistics. How much has the temperature increased from a reliable weather data source?

You know those citrus trees you are citing? Well it's a well known fact that you can plant species of trees that will adapt to a different zone.

Try planting the seeds and see if they survive. I was taught that in high school.

Indonesia had their first ever recorded snowfall in 2013. It doesn't mean a thing. It's not proof of anything.

Here I will do it for you.

[h=2]Past weather Mobile - january 2015[/h]
Average high temperature:59.8°F (normal: 61°F)
Average low temperature:37.3°F (normal: 40°F)
Average temperature:48.55°F (normal: 50°F)
Total Precipitation:3.89 inch (normal: 5.67 inch)
Total snowfall:0 inch
Highest max temperature:78.1°F
Lowest max temperature:37.9°F
Highest min temperature:62.1°F
Lowest min temperature:17.2°F
 
Aunt Bea said:
I tend to agree.

It seems like each time we have a natural disaster in this country we look to the government for money to rebuild on the same spot in pretty much the same way. At some point we need to look for a pattern and outlaw building in areas prone to natural disaster or rebuild in a way that allows us to coexist with nature and minimize damage.

"Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results"
Click to expand...

I agree with you completely.
 
Butterfly said:
I agree with you completely.
Click to expand...

Hurricanes have been taking place in the same places for centuries. People just rebuild and carry on. What are you going to do? Move the state?

Deadliest US hurricane. The Hurricane of 1900 made landfall on September 8, 1900, in Galveston, Texas, in the United States. It had estimated winds of 145 miles per hour (233 km/h) at landfall, making it a Category 4 storm on the Saffir–Simpson Hurricane Scale.
 
Camper6 said:
I'm sorry but your memory of childhood days isn't scientific enough for me. That's just hearsay evidence.

There isn't an adult around that can't relate a story about how tough things were when they were in school.

I want actual statistics. How much has the temperature increased from a reliable weather data source?

You know those citrus trees you are citing? Well it's a well known fact that you can plant species of trees that will adapt to a different zone.

Try planting the seeds and see if they survive. I was taught that in high school.
Click to expand...

That's it Dude. We're done.

 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top