Create Account



The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
Global Warming, er Climate Change is a National Security Threat


Quote:2015 is the warmest year on record. Again. So it goes.


Well yeah, when you keep adjusting the past downward after the fact that tends to happen.
“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!



Quote:2015 is the warmest year on record. Again. So it goes.
 

Not in either of the records that are actually global.




                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"
Reply


Quote:I'm not going to sit here and debate (again) the idea of <del>global warming</del> climate change. The "science" involved will support either side of the debate. What gets me more is that this whole <del>global warming</del> climate change crap has made it's way into the DoD.


Actually it only supports one side.
Reply


Quote:Actually it only supports one side.
 

Yes, but the UN is firmly lined up on the other side.





                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"
Reply


Quote:Not in either of the records that are actually global.


Lol you guys are like roaches.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.sciencealert.com/2015-was-officially-the-hottest-year-on-record-says-nasa-and-noaa'>http://www.sciencealert.com/2015-was-officially-the-hottest-year-on-record-says-nasa-and-noaa</a>


Yea it is. 2016 will break the record again. You'll deny that too. So it goes.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!



Quote:Lol you guys are like roaches.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.sciencealert.com/2015-was-officially-the-hottest-year-on-record-says-nasa-and-noaa'>http://www.sciencealert.com/2015-was-officially-the-hottest-year-on-record-says-nasa-and-noaa</a>


Yea it is. 2016 will break the record again. You'll deny that too. So it goes.
 

What was the temperature in 1974? Because it's been changed about 3 times in the last year, and always, ALWAYS the direction that makes today look worse than it is. Almost like it's planned that way.

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply


Quote:What was the temperature in 1974? Because it's been changed about 3 times in the last year, and always, ALWAYS the direction that makes today look worse than it is. Almost like it's planned that way.


Do you under the concept of average global temperatures?
Reply


Quote:Do you under the concept of average global temperatures?
 

No, I over them.

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply


Here. Yes, it's a blog. Yes, it's still accurate.

 

http://www.mrctv.org/blog/claim-2015-was...kx5ry:0AYE


“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!



Quote:Here. Yes, it's a blog. Yes, it's still accurate.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.mrctv.org/blog/claim-2015-was-hottest-year-ever-bogus#.gxkx5ry:0AYE'>http://www.mrctv.org/blog/claim-2015-was-hottest-year-ever-bogus#.gxkx5ry:0AYE</a>


A blog? Why not Nature, PloSOne, NCBI, JSTOR, IPCC, Science, etc etc? I can't take a blog seriously.
Reply


Quote:A blog? Why not Nature, PloSOne, NCBI, JSTOR, IPCC, Science, etc etc? I can't take a blog seriously.
 

I know, but they presented the issue clearly using small words. I thought that might help you.

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply


Quote:I know, but they presented the issue clearly using small words. I thought that might help you.


I'm a scientist that studies this stuff. I think you might be the one that needs the small words buddy.
Reply


Quote:I'm a scientist that studies this stuff. I think you might be the one that needs the small words buddy.
 

lol.

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


(This post was last modified: 01-22-2016, 03:38 PM by Solid Snake.)

Quote:lol.

Not sure what's so funny. I have a Bachelors of Science and MS in Environmental Sciences. I'm currently working on a PhD in Environmental Health Sciences and specialize in Microbial Ecology, Microbial Genomics, Environmental Microbiology and Biotechnology.
Reply


Good for you.
“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply


Apparently reading blogs and having an extreme political view trumps science. Science tends to kill a few of their beliefs...
Reply


Quote:Apparently reading blogs and having an extreme political view trumps science. Science tends to kill a few of their beliefs...
 

That explains the Left's support of the Global Warming scam.





                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!



Quote:That explains the Left's support of the Global Warming scam.


What are you on about. Science shouldn't be about political opinion. Let's say the science is wrong, isn't using renewables better than using up finite resources anyway?
Reply


Quote:What are you on about. Science shouldn't be about political opinion. Let's say the science is wrong, isn't using renewables better than using up finite resources anyway?


What should be is irrelevant, science is a political tool used to gain wealth and power.


And renewables are valid for the right price point, just like fracking our anything else.
“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply


Quote:What are you on about. Science shouldn't be about political opinion. Let's say the science is wrong, isn't using renewables better than using up finite resources anyway?
 

What do you mean by "renewables?"


 

Solar and wind are very bad for the environment. Home rooftop solar is marginally useful, especially if stored using a battery array, but trying to use wind and solar to feed the electrical grid is wasteful. Because they are intermittent sources they need to be backed up by other power plants on standby, so the savings in finite resources is minimal. Until we have a major breakthrough in storage technology (e.g. batteries) it's stupid to push for wind and solar, and wind still has the problem of killing endangered birds and bats.


 

Hydro power is useful, but pretty much every place it can be used it already is, so there's not a lot of growth potential there.


 

Corn ethanol production requires the use of fossil fuels, so much that it's nearly useless in reducing their use, and raises the price of food to boot, which disproportionately hurts the poor (as does more expensive electricity from wind and solar). Speaking of regressive policies, r
ight now tax dollars are subsidizing electric cars, which only the rich can afford.

 
I'm not opposed to the government investing in research in renewables and other advances that enable them. I prefer the X-prize method, where the government offers a huge prize to the developer of a wanted technological advance; that way it only costs the taxpayer if successful. I am opposed to using force to require or subsidize the use of technologies that have not been fully developed.


 

 

There's no need to push inefficient technologies today. There's plenty of time. We have sufficient fossil fuels for hundreds of years. Think of how much technology has progressed since 1816.





                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"
Reply




Users browsing this thread:

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!