Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    11:28 AM

GasBuddy News Article

51
votes
Clean Energy Policy: Reducing Climate Change Without the Politics

AOL Energy -- Having lived through summer after summer in Washington, D.C., with temperatures continuously climbing above 100 degrees and increasingly violent storms (with scientists echoing that things seem to be progressing more quickly then once thought), I finally am compelled to comment on the topic of climate change.
Given these circumstances, it seems that at long last, a real conversation about climate change is bound to happen. I actually think climate change policy does not have to be mired in politics, especially when the skepticism is concentrated in a small part of the political spectrum in Washington, D.C.

In 2010, I participated as part of a trade delegation to COP-15 in Copenhagen. I was then heading up the GridWise Alliance, and attended the climate negotiations to meet with other busi


Read the Full Article

Submitted Jul 29, 2012 By: dgerst
Category: Daily News Article Discussions > Topics Add to favorite topics  
Author Topic: Clean Energy Policy: Reducing Climate Change Without the Politics Back to Topics
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
honda0105
Champion Author Tallahassee

Posts:22,985
Points:2,221,965
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Aug 2, 2012 3:54:58 AM

can't get clean energy w/out political involvement. Let's face it.
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2012 7:58:49 PM

First time?

Really?

You've been pulling quotes from that same 'quote-list' for several days now.

And you expect people to believe that?

Sure, it may not have been that same website, but I'd venture to guess it was the same list. Some of the incorrect dates you've posted match the incorrect dates on that list. And the incorrect university affiliation matched that list.

Coincidence?
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2012 7:07:28 PM

LOL, that's funny, I just took at look at what must be Marty's bible site posted below, first time I've seen that one.

Did anyone see this one on there?

"In fact, the life of all mankind is in danger because of global warming resulting to a large degree from the emissions of the factories of the major corporations; yet despite that, the representative of these corporations in the White House insists on not observing the Kyoto accord, with the knowledge that the statistics speak of the death and displacement of millions of human beings because of global warming, especially in Africa." - Osama bin Laden

Or how about this one "The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models.” - Chris Folland University of East Anglia of the infamous climategate
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2012 6:21:09 PM

And for those that don't know, TT is pulling all these supposed "quotes" from the following webpage:

Trolling for Dumbies: anti-Global Warmist edition

S/he is doing little more than randomly pulling quotes from the list, and randomly posting them in the various threads on this topic. Most cannot be verified, and others are taken out-of-context and/or deliberate misrepresentations of the quote.
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2012 6:08:04 PM

"As we continue to see the regurgitation of the manipulated IPCC data that was soley intended to prove a predetermined hypothesis, completely opposite to objective science. One may ask why?..."

-----

Manipulated IPCC data?

The "IPCC" doesn't conduct research, collect data, analyze data, nor publish data. It is a UN panel that produces an assessment report on climate change, based upon the latest peer reviewed and published scientific literature, by volunteer scientists and experts.

What are you going to try to deliberately misrepresent next?


[Edited by: Martinman at 8/1/2012 8:14:36 PM EST]
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2012 11:07:17 AM

"AGENDA 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on earth... Effective execution of AGENDA 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society,unlike anything the world has ever experienced -- a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources."

- Environmental activist and attorney Daniel Sitarz on the UN's Agenda 21


[Edited by: drpepperTX at 8/1/2012 1:08:01 PM EST]
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2012 9:30:39 AM

"I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis." - Al Gore

Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2012 9:21:54 AM

"The ONLY way to get our SOCIETY to truly CHANGE is to FRIGHTEN people with the possibility of a CATASTROPHE." - Professor Daniel Botkin a proponent of AGW.

Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2012 7:01:15 AM

As we continue to see the regurgitation of the manipulated IPCC data that was soley intended to prove a predetermined hypothesis, completely opposite to objective science. One may ask why?

Well, a quote from Maurice Strong, a member of the Club of Rome as he explained the purpose to the United Nations, goes a long way to the explanation behind the false science.

Here's what Strong said of the established goal of the Club of Rome to the UN
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that .. the threat of global warming.. would fit the bill…. the real enemy, then, is humanity itself….we believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is a real one or….one invented for the purpose.”

Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 11:29:28 PM

Solar Cycles & Climate Change

... Latest science reveals that sharp increases in global warming "precede" sharp increases in CO2--not the other way around. Global warming causes more CO2 to be released from the oceans. Current research also shows that Earth's oceans are now beginning to cool. It is also now clear that temperatures over the last century correlate far better with cycles in oceans than they do with carbon dioxide; and, the temperature cycles in oceans are caused by cycles of the sun. Yet the AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) advocates, as well as the media, continue to ignore all of this, perpetuating fear and advocating spending billions of dollars on non-solutions

-----

First, the title to the above blog site page is "Solar Cycles & Climate Change"

Second, the scientific research shows that in prior climate cycles where temperature increased, *most* were preceded by warming before the increases in CO2. The postive feedback system for CO2 and 800-year time lag are well known, well understood, and published in the literature.

Third, the reason it was not the other way around, was due to the fact that prior climate changes have been precipitated by other events (Milankovich cycles, continental drift, etc.), NOT large releases of CO2. Because CO2 was not the forcing factor in prior climate cycles where temperatures increased, is why there is a time-lag in those cycles. Because CO2 was not the forcing factor in prior climate cycles, does not mean it cannot be the forcing factor in subsequent climate cycles. This is another textbook example of faulty logic.

Fourth, current research does NOT show that Earth's oceans are now beginning to cool. It shows that the heat is being transported to deeper depths (700'-2000'), where it affects ocean currents and circulation patterns, affects melting rates in the polar regions, and may be resulting in more severe ENSO (El Nino Southern Oscillation) cycles that have been shown to influence short-term regional weather patterns.

Fifth, current research also shows that CO2 is the only forcing agent that completely explains (correlates) the sharp climate reversal that started more than 30 years ago. Data are starting to show the Earth's oceans are the intermediate transport mechanism between the warming resulting from the buildup of atmospheric CO2 and gradual increase in mean Global temperatures over long periods of time, that ultimately drive Global climate patterns.

Sixth, the data clearly show that there is no link between solar output (solar irradiance or solar insolation) in clmate trends starting in 1979. The data actually show the exact opposite.

Seventh, each of the claims that "the other planets are heating up" have been shown to be false. Every single one.

In the cases of Triton and Pluto, orbital dynamics explain the changes. In the cases of Mars and Jupiter, it is atmospheric patterns that are the driving force for the apparent changes in climate.

But most importantly.

Even if CO2 is not causing the current climate trend, the upcoming shifts resulting from Global Warming will still be the same. Coastal areas will still be flooded by melting of the world's glaciers and ice sheets. Crop regions that will no longer be able to produce the world's crops, oceans that will no longer provide seafood that feed billions. Pest species that spread disease will still expand their areas of distribution, bringing diseases and viruses that currently kill tens-of-thousands where they are currently restricted to tropical climates. Hurricanes will still be more frequent and more severe, floods and droughts longer, more widespread and more severe.

Most of this we know from the prior climate cycles where the Earth was warmer.

Scare tactics no.

Reality yes.

-----

Again, you're repeatitive trolling of this forum, repeatedly posting these false statements, only further shows people how disingenuine your intentions are.

[Edited by: Martinman at 8/1/2012 1:35:12 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 9:35:38 PM

drpepper posted...

"Pluto warming

-----

Given that 1) Pluto's orbit takes 284 Earth years to complete; 2) that the planet was discovered 1930 and has yet to complete even half of one 'yearly' orbit; and that 3) the orbit is highly elliptical - what changes it is experiencing is a direct result of its orbital dynamics.

Wiki has a pretty decent anamation of Pluto's orbit and other informnation.

Given that Pluto receives only 1/900 the solar energy of Earth, that it passed perihelion in 1989 (closest point during elliptical orbit), and the south pole emerge from perpetual darkness for the first time in 120 years, current thinking is that the change in brightness is due to the migration of nitrogen and methane from its south polar region to the north polar cap.

-----

READ !
Profile Pic
iagdboy
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,042
Points:1,002,530
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 8:54:53 PM

move
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 8:41:54 PM

drpepper posted...

"Jupiter's recent outbreak of red spots is likely related to large scale climate change as the gas giant planet is getting warmer near the equator."

-----

This one isn't even laughable.

The supposed article linked to about, is NASA's Astronomy Picture of the Day (hence the 'apod' in the URL address) from MAY 23, 2008.

It's easy to cut-and-paste some text from the images caption. And it doesn't take much effort to read a little to learn that it is these large storms on Jupiter that are driving the planets climate, not the other way around as someone would deliberately attempt to mislead you into thinking.

If you click on the climate change hotlink on the very last line of the images caption, you will find the URL address is no longer valid.

So, do a search for Global climate change Jupiter, and vewella we find a 2004 paper in _Nature_ (Prediction of a global climate change on Jupiter)

The _Nature_ paper is quite technical, so here's the public press release by UC Berkeley, on the _Nature_ paper:

Researcher predicts global climate change on Jupiter as giant planet's spots disappear

The latter version is an easy read.

And again, it's obvious that someone simply pulled some text off a NASA picture caption, simply because it contained the words "climate change".

Thank you for trolling our forum again...
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 7:39:46 PM

Latest science reveals that sharp increases in global warming "precede" sharp increases in CO2--not the other way around. Global warming causes more CO2 to be released from the oceans. Current research also shows that Earth's oceans are now beginning to cool. It is also now clear that temperatures over the last century correlate far better with cycles in oceans than they do with carbon dioxide; and, the temperature cycles in oceans are caused by cycles of the sun. Yet the AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) advocates, as well as the media, continue to ignore all of this, perpetuating fear and advocating spending billions of dollars on non-solutions
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 7:25:45 PM

drpepper posted...

"Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming...."

-----

Is there are reason you insist on trolling these threads with deliberately misleading information?

I can only think of two possible reasons. One, you simply don't understand what it is you posting. Two, your deliberating posting it knowing that 99.9% won't know whether the information is valid or bogus.

And I'm truly curious. Did you simply do a Google search for 'mars warming' and post the first credible-sounding article title you found?

Because it is obvious you did not read it...

-----

The article is from the February 2007 National Geographic. The article title reflects a theory being [then] proposed by Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia.

From page one of the article:

"In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide 'ice caps' near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.

Abdussamatov, [theorized] the Mars data [was] evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.

'The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars,' he said."

Remember, this is in 2007.

-----

From page two of the same NG article:

"'His views are completely at odds with the mainstream scientific opinion,' said Colin Wilson, a planetary physicist at England's Oxford University.

Amato Evan, a climate scientist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, added that 'the idea just isn't supported by the theory or by the observations.'

Planets' Wobbles

The conventional theory is that climate changes on Mars can be explained primarily by small alterations in the planet's orbit and tilt, not by changes in the sun.

'Wobbles in the orbit of Mars are the main cause of its climate change in the current era,' Oxford's Wilson explained. (Related: "[L=]
Don't Blame Sun for Global Warming, Study Says[/L]" [September 13, 2006].)

All planets experience a few wobbles as they make their journey around the sun. Earth's wobbles are known as Milankovitch cycles and occur on time scales of between 20,000 and 100,000 years.

These fluctuations change the tilt of Earth's axis and its distance from the sun and are thought to be responsible for the waxing and waning of ice ages on Earth.

Mars and Earth wobble in different ways, and most scientists think it is pure coincidence that both planets are between ice ages right now.

'Mars has no [large] moon, which makes its wobbles much larger, and hence the swings in climate are greater too,' Wilson said."

-----

On page two, he contradicts the basic premise of his own theory, by stating:

"'The solar irradiance began to drop in the 1990s, and a minimum will be reached by approximately 2040,' Abdussamatov said. 'It will cause a steep cooling of the climate on Earth in 15 to 20 years.' "

So, which is it? Is solar irradiance increasing, or decreasing? Abdussamatov's theory requires that it be increasing, based upon his theory.

And, anyone recall this NASA graph, from below? Maximum Solar Irradiance occrring in 1960, with a steady decline starting in 1979?

Global Temperature Change vs Total Solar Irradiance
(Global Warming for Dumbies version of previous graph)
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 4:10:43 PM

Jupiter's recent outbreak of red spots is likely related to large scale climate change as the gas giant planet is getting warmer near the equator.
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 4:07:25 PM

Pluto warming
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 4:02:15 PM

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming....
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 10:56:52 AM

Oh.

And did anyone else catch the glaring error in the last graph of the pseudo-article that TT posted?

I'll provide a link, so there's no confusion over which webpage I'm refering to:

Relationship between Solar Cycle Length and Global Temperature Anomalies

Go to the last graph on page 3 of the .pdf document, and see if you can find the error...

Now. See if you can find the other glaring error on the page 2 gragh.

And you're relying on this, as the basis for *your* beliefs?

fail!

[Edited by: Martinman at 7/31/2012 12:57:42 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 31, 2012 10:38:43 AM

Just as I thought.

You continue to troll Recent News topics such as this one, post bogus claims, post quotes out-of-context, and misleading information - and then disappear once people start to challenge you with the evidence.

Btw, we're still waiting on the Mars/Jupiter/Triton/Pluto proof...

-----

Bueller...

.

Bueller...

.

Bueller...
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 10:33:59 PM

Sorry, it is well documented that there has been a decrease in solar output since ~1960 (solar irradiance maxima):

Total Solar Irradiance as measured by satellite from 1978 to 2010
(shows a declining trend, over the 23 year period)

Annual global temperature change (thin light red) with 11 year moving average of temperature (thick dark red). Temperature from NASA GISS. Annual Total Solar Irradiance (thin light blue) with 11 year moving average of TSI (thick dark blue).
(shows a declining trend in solar irradiance since 1960, and a clear divergence between solar output and temperature since 1976)

Global temperature (red, NASA GISS) and Total solar irradiance (blue, 1880 to 1978 from Solanki, 1979 to 2009 from PMOD).
(Global Warming for Dumbies version of previous graph)

Additionally, and quoting from the link *you* provided:

"Since net solar radiation is slightly higher during periods of heightened sunspot activity (and lower during periods of little sunspot activity), the combination of long solar cycles and low sunspot numbers results in cumulatively more months on a decadal time scale with below average net solar radiation. The result is that weak and long solar cycles lead to cooling on a global basis while short and intense solar cycles tend to result in warming on a global basis...."

-----

Note the last line. The most recent solar cycle has been "the longest solar cycle since 1798-1810, measured trough to trough. The cycle lasted approximately 150 months or 12.5 years, two full years longer than the 20th century average of 10.5 years."

Other similiar supporting text (decreasing Global temperatures correlate to decreasing solar output) appear later in the same text.

Furthermore, the professional peer review literature overwhelming shows a period of declining solar output (irradiance) at the same time Global Mean Temperature began increasing. Studies also show *no* effect of solar flares on Global Mean Temperature.

Damn, you could at least read it before trying to [incorrectly] use it as a defense.

Next - Mars? Titan?
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 9:43:02 PM

Relationship between Solar Cycle Length and Global Temperature Anomalies
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 5:08:55 PM

What warming?

There is none.

Show proof, versus posting your patent statements of unproven myths and half-truths.
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,413
Points:1,360,820
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 3:35:14 PM

I wonder how the politicians are handling the warming that is occurring on Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, and on Neptune's largest moon Triton? Surely this phenomena is not related to solar activity but man as well? ;^)
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 3:01:07 PM

Well, I think you'll agree that some of the member posts here go beyond laugable, to 'really?' - given how patently superficial the comments are. Ocassionally, the Church Lady just seems to be the appropriate way to bring out those obvious 'really?' moments - in this case the comment about natural [climate] cycles.

One of the things I truly enjoyed about Dana Carvey's 'Church Lady' parodies, was [her] "Could it be... SATAN?" reply. It gives that added little sarcasm to the replies, that brings a little levity the replies sometimes need.

SNL just hasn't been the same without Church Lady...
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 2:59:40 PM

rx7racerca from Calgary posted...

"Gearitis: The facts are actually the opposite - humans emit around 135 [times] as much CO2 annually as volcanoes. Making stuff up (which is not likely your doing, but that of the Heritage Foundation or associated shell groups - same lobbyist folks who in the 90's, working for Philip Morris, put out misinformation denying tobacco use and cancer relationships) doesn't refute climate change - or that human activity has a large bearing on it.

Discovery news: humans dwarf volcanic CO2 emissions.

Humans are currently adding around 32 gigatonnes of CO2 annually to the atmosphere - which is only a portion or that added by natural processes, around 780GT, but those same natural processes also remove equivalent CO2 levels, so they balance. Volcanoes are not the source of the nearly 50% increase in atmospheric CO2 levels in the last 120 years; fossil fuels are. That this is so is testable, as fossil fuel CO2 emissions have differing ratios of C12 to C13 isotopes than natural sources, which include plants, the oceans, and volcanism - and which have existed in a close balance of absorption and emission for millions of years, and moved only a small range, which we have already significantly exceeded.

Atmospheric C12/C13 ratios have shifted, in proportions expected if the course of the rapid increase of CO2 was primarily fossil fuel emissions. That said, scientists do expect we are reaching a tipping point for positive feedback - where rising CO2 levels trigger further, large CO2 releases from natural reserves - specifically methane clathrates in the arctic, and continental shelves - which will magnify the rate of change.

Skeptical Science: human vs. natural CO2 emissions"

-----

Ah, another of the myths you hear recited ad nauseum by many here...

The anti-AGW crowd continually profess that a single volcanic eruption release more CO2 than anthropogenic (human) sources for an entire year.

Ah,... no.

If that's the case, why did global temperatures for the Northern Hemisphere actually *decrease* in the 3-years following the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991? And how about earlier large-scale volcanic events where it has now also been shown? Why did the Global temperature drop?

Northern Temperature Change following Mount Pinatubo Eruption

Why has this been documented not once, but mutliple times following significant volcanic reuptions since 1900?

Its because there is more released than just CO2 - like ash, SO2, and other particulants (also referred to as aerosols), which function to counter/balance the short-term effects of volcanic CO2 releases to the point they actually *lower* Global temperatures - NOT increase them.


[Edited by: Martinman at 7/30/2012 5:06:28 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Rehorsehay
All-Star Author California

Posts:871
Points:45,925
Joined:Feb 2012
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 10:54:19 AM

@ Martinman Your post is too funny! I love church lady LOL!
Profile Pic
52MPG
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:9,887
Points:2,352,425
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 10:27:34 AM

"climate change" is a natural process hijacked for political reasons.
Profile Pic
JuicyQ69
All-Star Author San Bernardino

Posts:853
Points:1,605,710
Joined:Apr 2009
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 11:38:24 PM

Without politics!? Yeah, right!
Profile Pic
Martinman
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:17,354
Points:2,696,540
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 11:38:07 PM

Natural cycles, huh?

Can any of you explain even one, much less which one is to blame?

And please explain "which" natural cycle has recently changed, that would account for the current climate warming trend?

[Church Lady]

... Could it be that the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit has 'changed' ?

... Could it be that the precession in the Earth's orbit has 'changed' ?

... Could it be that the tilt of the Earth's axis has 'changed' ?

... Could it be plate tectonics/Continental Drift has 'changed' ?

... Could it be,... SATAN !?

[/Church Lady]

Each of the Earth's well established cyclical events that "drive" the Earth's climate (also referred to as 'forcing'), are extremely long-term events, which are well documented and pretty well understood. These occur in the tens-of-thousands (21,000 / 26,000 / 41,000), and hundreds-of-thousands (100,000) years cycles. Cycles that are not readily changed, nor that simply reverse themselves even on the order of decades. Not to mention that we pretty well know where the Earth is currently at in each of these cycles.

So again. What 'natural cycle' is responsible for this...?

Anyone?

TFamily4 ?

Profile Pic
esquared
Champion Author Oklahoma City

Posts:10,131
Points:2,478,295
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:55:34 PM

Without politics? Dream on....
Profile Pic
TFamily4
Rookie Author Idaho

Posts:36
Points:26,685
Joined:Jul 2012
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:50:32 PM

I love the topic of climate change for one reason: IT IS RIDICULOUS! When you look at the history of the world, the temperature varied dramatically, from cold to really hot. Looking at the time line, we would be slowly starting into the really hot phase in the next couple hundred years. The earth is cooler now that the historical average, as far as scientists have been able to calculate. IT IS GOING TO GET HOTTER, with or with out us living. Relax, take a chill pill. Yes, care for the environment, but if you start saying that people can't breath because it releases too much greenhouse gasses, you are getting too extreme and haven't done your homework, so shut up environmentalists, you do more harm that good.
Profile Pic
carman11
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:6,057
Points:1,302,500
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:49:12 PM

SOUNDS GOOD, IF ONLY THE OTHER COUNTRIES FELT THE SAME WAY. THEY ARE NOT AS CRAZY AS WE ARE. WE COULD GO BACK TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS. HORSE AND BUGGY AND NO LIGHTS. THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF ALL OF THE PROBLEMS.
Profile Pic
naiiawah
Champion Author Boise

Posts:4,746
Points:1,278,030
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:48:45 PM

"...that at long last...", after it is probably too late.
Profile Pic
unicornIL
All-Star Author Chicago

Posts:555
Points:685,965
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:48:25 PM

Muzzle the politicians and we might have a chance, term limits are a good place to start. Have them get the same insurance coverage we all get and have their pensions taken away and let them receive social security, maybe then they will start fixing the problems they've created.
Profile Pic
vcsuksu21
Champion Author Oklahoma City

Posts:2,543
Points:963,085
Joined:Dec 2010
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:44:12 PM


ok
Profile Pic
Bubba44612
Champion Author Ohio

Posts:9,948
Points:2,483,115
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:43:41 PM

WOW. Most of the global warming comes from the politicians anyways.
Profile Pic
us4usa
Champion Author Missouri

Posts:7,095
Points:1,493,920
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:43:19 PM

So what ended the ICE AGE the SUV??? Maybe we should outlaw all cars and trucks, go back to horse and buggy??? Tell it to DC...
Profile Pic
Eugenian
Champion Author Oregon

Posts:2,785
Points:540,645
Joined:Oct 2009
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:43:18 PM

Prominent climate change skeptic reverses course:

http://goo.gl/RoRf1

Profile Pic
boatfloyd
Champion Author Jacksonville

Posts:4,389
Points:999,490
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:43:02 PM

What is the truth?
Profile Pic
jkpsr
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,936
Points:1,574,680
Joined:Jun 2005
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:37:58 PM

Tell it to the Republicans.
Profile Pic
Rageagainsttm
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,767
Points:2,493,985
Joined:Jul 2007
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:36:13 PM

ok
Profile Pic
Sody33
Champion Author Las Vegas

Posts:19,650
Points:2,218,560
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:34:51 PM

It appears to me that for the past few years (about 12 now) politics is into everything even those things which should be apolitical
Profile Pic
pastorpaulcg
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:3,615
Points:777,635
Joined:Dec 2010
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:30:12 PM

impossible
Profile Pic
farn1958
All-Star Author Twin Cities

Posts:886
Points:183,385
Joined:Feb 2011
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:29:29 PM

Blah Blah Blah
Profile Pic
CAroadrunner101
Champion Author California

Posts:4,334
Points:1,894,850
Joined:Mar 2009
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:28:50 PM

whatever...
Profile Pic
TFowler513
Champion Author Memphis

Posts:3,824
Points:1,951,060
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:28:46 PM

Unless we reduce carbon emission to zero real soon, it won't matter. We are quickly approaching the fail safe point!!!
Profile Pic
Tigercat88
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:5,830
Points:1,228,965
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:28:12 PM

Enviro-Nuts
Profile Pic
joel27nc
Champion Author Raleigh

Posts:13,177
Points:2,467,020
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:25:49 PM

Gotta look at the big picture.
Profile Pic
heartbroken2010
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:6,960
Points:1,508,835
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 10:24:49 PM

Hmm.
Post a reply Back to Topics