And if it does exist, then it'll greatly affect big money corporations.  So it works both ways.

And who is writing the checks?

 

You suck at this. You should stick to name calling on the transvestite thread.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/h...story.html

---

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/h...story.html

 

If you're going to post something, post science instead of a newspaper story. Newspapers always go for the big scare, whether or not it's reasonable.


Here's Miami:


 

http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrend...id=8723170

 

For some reason, their (NOAA's) data does not go past about 1983, but the trend, even including an exceptionally low value as a starting point, is 2.39 mm/yr, with no evidence of an increase. From my eyeball obeservation, it seems that the rate actually decreased in the last decade or two of the data. Key West does go to present and has a value of 2.31 mm/yr, pretty much the same as what's given for Miami. Also, the rate of sea level rise was the same BEFORE humanity started enriching the atmosphere with CO2, so it's anti-scientific to blame humans or CO2 for the sea level rise.


 

To put 2.39 mm/yr in perspective, that would be just over 8 inches by the year 2100.


 

Better start running uphill now, gaining 8 inches in only 86 years will be a challenge.

---

                                                                          

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

DP 

---

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

The science speaks for itself, friend. No echo chamber needed.


Care for me to explain it? Be advised 4th grade level math and science skills required.

 

Good thing I dun gradeated the sixth grade den!

 

Here, I'll put it in a syntax that you can understand:

 

Global - global - global 

 

Warming - warming - warming

 

is - is -is

 

 Bull [BAD WORD REMOVED]- Bull [BAD WORD REMOVED] - Bull [BAD WORD REMOVED]

---

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

Good thing I dun gradeated the sixth grade den!


Here, I'll put it in a syntax that you can understand:

Global - global - global

Warming - warming - warming

is - is -is


Bull [BAD WORD REMOVED]- Bull [BAD WORD REMOVED] - Bull [BAD WORD REMOVED]

Lol, if you say so. I wouldn't vote for Scott though, he has already spent $250 mil combating a non-existent [BAD WORD REMOVED].


Talk about throwing money down the drain!

---

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/h...story.html

 

That's pretty funny.  

---

http://mashable.com/2014/10/29/global-gr...te-change/

---

I think it's telling that global warming denial is concentrated among small-government conservatives and libertarians.   So why is it that people with a certain political view have taken a stand on a scientific question?    The answer is, because small-government conservatives and libertarians are so afraid of the solutions to global warming that they choose denial.   It's like if you told someone a car is coming and they better get out of the road.   And their answer is, "I don't want you telling me what to do, and I don't want to get out of the road, therefore, there is no car." 

 

My view of global warming is this:   It probably exists.  Scientists are usually right.  But the solutions seem to be so expensive and distasteful, that I'm not sure I want to do anything about it.   Besides, it is impossible to get people to take action on a problem that is decades away.  We will just have to deal with it as it comes.   Build seawalls and put in pumping systems in cities, move to higher ground.  We need to prepare ourselves for the consequences, because we are not going to be able to slow it down or reverse it. 

 

Don't buy waterfront property. 

---

I think it's telling that global warming denial is concentrated among small-government conservatives and libertarians.   So why is it that people with a certain political view have taken a stand on a scientific question?    The answer is, because small-government conservatives and libertarians are so afraid of the solutions to global warming that they choose denial.   It's like if you told someone a car is coming and they better get out of the road.   And their answer is, "I don't want you telling me what to do, and I don't want to get out of the road, therefore, there is no car." 

 

My view of global warming is this:   It probably exists.  Scientists are usually right.  But the solutions seem to be so expensive and distasteful, that I'm not sure I want to do anything about it.   Besides, it is impossible to get people to take action on a problem that is decades away.  We will just have to deal with it as it comes.   Build seawalls and put in pumping systems in cities, move to higher ground.  We need to prepare ourselves for the consequences, because we are not going to be able to slow it down or reverse it. 

 

Don't buy waterfront property. 

 

My view is this: It exists in a natural form mostly influenced by the Sun and geological occurrences beyond the control of man . Man has a very limited impact on the change, and as more evidence comes to light (ex, those 1960s era Sat Films that were just recovered that show ice shelf readings that contradict modern GCC Alarmist understanding or predictions) more people will understand that the movement is motivated by profiteers like Al Gore and watermelon socialists who are using the "movement" to achieve their political goals. If it were something to worry about, which it's not, we couldn't slow it down or reverse it anyway, man does not control nature. More concerning is the water table issue that was posted above, we've known for decades that our use of ground water was unsustainable because of growth, not because of GCC, and we've not done much about it. That is kind issue we should be concerned with, one we actually could do something about.

---

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

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/h...ml?hpid=z1

---

The picture of the Pale Blue Dot had a profound influence on my thinking and beliefs.  Carl Sagan is a personal hero of mine and his words set the narrative of how mankind should exist and protect this dot we live on.  There is but the thinnest wisp of environment that protects us against the instant deadly vacuum of space.  Walk two miles in a straight line, then stand that distance on end.  That is the survivable environment we live in against the huge vastness of space.  Two miles, two, against distances so vast that a beam of light can travel unswerving for billions of years.  Think about that.  I mean really think.  And yet we exist on this planet to expend vast amounts blood and treasure killing each other and arguing about whether we should take measures to protect that supremely important wisp.

 

http://youtu.be/p86BPM1GV8M

---

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/02/world/ipcc...?hpt=hp_c2

 

I know there's a lot of hatred towards the United Nations (I won't say unjustly in a few instances...), what do y'all think about this? 

---

Live long and prosper \\// 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/02/world/ipcc...?hpt=hp_c2

 

I know there's a lot of hatred towards the United Nations (I won't say unjustly in a few instances...), what do y'all think about this? 

 

I spent the beginning of the year in Korea.  The pollution from China was literally breathtaking.  Some mornings when I took my first breath outside, it would send me into coughing fits.  There is a constant yellow haze that hangs over the peninsula from Chinese factories churning out unchecked amounts of pollution.  People who have been exposed to only the relatively clean air of the Untied States, and other developed western countries, understandably express cynicism about environmental protection.  If they could witness the unfettered environmental fouling in Asia and the Indian subcontinent, they would be appalled. 

---

I spent the beginning of the year in Korea.  The pollution from China was literally breathtaking.  Some mornings when I took my first breath outside, it would send me into coughing fits.  There is a constant yellow haze that hangs over the peninsula from Chinese factories churning out unchecked amounts of pollution.  People who have been exposed to only the relatively clean air of the Untied States, and other developed western countries, understandably express cynicism about environmental protection.  If they could witness the unfettered environmental fouling in Asia and the Indian subcontinent, they would be appalled. 

 

Sure, we'll do more as soon as they catch up to us. Fair?

---

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

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/02/world/ipcc...?hpt=hp_c2

 

I know there's a lot of hatred towards the United Nations (I won't say unjustly in a few instances...), what do y'all think about this? 

 

One thing I saw, "greenhouse gases" goals are for zero percent by 2100. Isn't Co2 a greenhouse gas?

---

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

Sure, we'll do more as soon as they catch up to us. Fair?

 

We should always do more.  But the only way to get the developing world to catch up is to leverage action through the UN.  I can't think of another way.  Can you?

---

I spent the beginning of the year in Korea.  The pollution from China was literally breathtaking.  Some mornings when I took my first breath outside, it would send me into coughing fits.  There is a constant yellow haze that hangs over the peninsula from Chinese factories churning out unchecked amounts of pollution.  People who have been exposed to only the relatively clean air of the Untied States, and other developed western countries, understandably express cynicism about environmental protection.  If they could witness the unfettered environmental fouling in Asia and the Indian subcontinent, they would be appalled. 

 

The Global Warming movement has resulted in transferring the fossil fuel burning from the US and Europe, where it was done very cleanly, to China and India. That yellow haze is the result of Global Warming policies.

---

                                                                          

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

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/02/world/ipcc...?hpt=hp_c2

 

I know there's a lot of hatred towards the United Nations (I won't say unjustly in a few instances...), what do y'all think about this? 

 

The UN bureaucrats want total control of the world economy. Global Warming scare stories are a means to that end.

 

Meanwhile, the global temperature has flatlined for the past 18 years. Hurricanes are down, tornadoes are down, floods and droughts have not increased, and the sea level rise has been steady since it was first measured over a hundred years ago
 (see my earlier post)<span style="font-size:14.3999996185303px;">, well before mankind started enriching the atmosphere with CO2. The </span>UN bureaucrats are desperately afraid that people wil finally catch on to the fact that their claims are bunk, so they make their appeal more and more urgent each year. All of their scary predictions have failed, as is the case with every single prophecy of doom every made.

---

                                                                          

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

We should always do more.  But the only way to get the developing world to catch up is to leverage action through the UN.  I can't think of another way.  Can you?

 

How does the UN stop China from polluting? Threat of war? Threat of economic sanctions? Saying 'pretty please' over and over?

---

                                                                          

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