Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 11121 - 11140 of total 21618 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
raymond phule

climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:46pm PT

It's too bad you need to be an as#@&%e with such consistency.

And it is bad that you are such an idiot with such consistency.


I read the entire article. Dana Nuccitelli demonstrates the same kind of intellectual dishonesty that is seen in the Cook et al paper.

Intellectual dishonesty when he is using information from the IPCC report? The same information that chiloe gave above.

All you did in the past was to call him a liar. I really doubt that you have read the article.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:56pm PT
And if you weren't such a myopic dumbass, you'd easily see Nuccitelli's lies.

Sketch seems to know only two tricks: sh#t-stained insults, and calling people liars.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
Private enterprise?

The host of federal and state tax credits to power buyers and power generators suggests that public funding of so-called private enterprise, PG&E is an excellent example, continues as strong as ever.

No we're not building dams anymore. We are funding the development of solar power to the tune of 30% tax credit, for example. There are many other examples of tax dollars flowing into the hands of power company investors.

Sorta like the military or any other public commodity... we can all pretend private enterprise, till the sonsaboitches go out of business that is.

That's how Solano County ended up owning the top ten feet of Clear Lake in Lake County... abomination of private enterprise.

DMT

raymond phule

climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:08pm PT

And if you weren't such a myopic dumbass, you'd easily see Nuccitelli's lies.

I am sure that the chief, rick and ron agrees with you but very few thinking people.

I just found it ironic when the first hit in google when I googled the IPCC quote were an article that you have claimed that you have read (but of course didn't like).

"It is extremely likely [95 percent confidence] more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together."

"The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period ... The observed warming since 1951 can be attributed to the different natural and anthropogenic drivers and their contributions can now be quantified. Greenhouse gases contributed a global mean surface warming likely to be in the range of 0.5C to 1.3 C over the period 1951−2010, with the contributions from other anthropogenic forcings, including the cooling effect of aerosols, likely to be in the range of −0.6C to 0.1C."

"The contribution from natural forcings is likely to be in the range of −0.1C to 0.1C, and from internal variability is likely to be in the range of −0.1C to 0.1C."

Is actually quote strongly suggest the conclusion that he made in the title.

But how would you know, you would need to have read the article... understand the article... putting your biases to the side and considered what he wrote... Neither of which is very likely to ever happen.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:12pm PT
It's likely that more than half... no... um... I'm mean ALL of the warming was caused by man.
More than half? All?
Such latitude.
It's all so confusing.
I need a nap.


When I posted my note about the AR5 summary I included a parenthetical remark about innumerates,

Here's how the IPCC AR5 (in a statement that befuddles some innumerates) summarizes the state of the art:

then I thought, that's too snarky, I should take it out. But then I thought naw, Sketch will express befuddlement and prove the point true. As he did.

For the numerate, or anyone open to learning: the AR5 statement below incorporates both an interval and a point estimate, like a confidence interval and a mean.

It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together. The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:15pm PT
Not... one... bit.

Zackly the SAME!!!

Chiloe is going to put hot iron into your scrot, the chief!

You will be reconciled!

DMT
raymond phule

climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:18pm PT

This is no different. Not one bit.

Just because you don't any science don't mean that science don't give any information.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:41pm PT
I grew up a TVA customer. Tennessee was THE most backwards state until the TVA brought power from the flood zones, courtesy of the New Deal.

DMT
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:42pm PT
Dingus,, tell me more about Clear lake!
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 30, 2013 - 02:05pm PT
The fact that all Electrical Power/Energy in the U.S. comes from Privately owned Power Sources and Grids. As well as all the fuel stations that the American people pump petrol into their vehicles.

Not one of the above is owned, managed by or directly regulated in any way by.... The U.S. Gov't.

I've highlighted the section you should study further, Chief.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 30, 2013 - 02:13pm PT
LOL, Chief. Give me your definition of Directly Regulated.

These industries are among the most regulated.

Do ya think your corner gas station can store the gas in any container they like, for example?

Do ya think power companies can just put up power lines anywhere without government approval?
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 30, 2013 - 02:17pm PT
So what?

Trying to change the subject?
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 02:20pm PT
Sure, Ron. I meant Yolo County, btw, not Solano. A slip of the mind.

Back in the day (when farmers ruled the state)...

The Central Valley was good farmland, everyone could recognize that. Taming the floods and making navigable winter roads was job one. In the 1800s it was virtually impossible to travel the Great Valley once the spring flooding began.

Anyway, numerous private enterprise groups formed 'water companies' in a wide variety of business formats from co-ops to communes. Turlock Irrigation District. Merced Irrigation District. Modesto Irrigation district. Etc. etc. etc.

They were all private. They all held ancestral water rights on their rivers of choice - basically since they were first they had and still have, FIRST DIBS on the water from their river systems.

One by one these original water companies were bought, sold, bankrupt, restarted, combined, etc. And each time this happened the ancestral 'first dibs' water rights transferred too.

That is the basic framework for why water is such a f*#king MESS in California... private enterprise, left to its own devices, will f*#k its customers every time, EVERY TIME. Just like every government will fail and democracy is only as good as an honest vote.

So... Lake County. Impoverished, by California standards. Always has been. There was no gold rush there to speak of. Farming is mostly boutique - the wine business helped out some. But to this day Lake County is the Mojave of the North; hot, dry tweaker-trailer country, haha.

Yolo Countyis one of the rich farm counties. Flat land, blessed farming climate and beau coup water! Where'd they get that water? Cache Creek is the drainage, so how did Yolo county get most of it?

http://www.co.lake.ca.us/Government/Directory/Water_Resources/Clear_Lake_Information/How_Yolo_Obtained_Claim_to_Waters_of_Clear_Lake.htm

How Yolo Obtained Claim to Waters of Clear Lake
Contrary to the belief of many, Lake County never owned the water of Clear Lake as it is held in the public trust by the State of California.


Persons owning land touching the lake or water courses have the littoral or riparian right to take water from these sources. Littoral and Riparian rights are a hold over from English Law.

The appropriation law, under which the Yolo County people secured their claim, was enacted into law in 1873, during the dispute between the hydraulic miners, establishing the right of the first to file for water. The history for the first to claim water from Cache Creek goes back to 1854 when the Moore Ditch Co. in Yolo County began preparations to take water from Cache Creek for irrigation purposes. Previous to this William Gordon, a naturalized Mexican citizen had been given grant of two square leagues of land between Sonoma and Napa and the Sacramento River with many rights by Mexican Governor Micheltreno.

Moore had acquired Gordon's holdings and it was on this land he established his ditch. In 1871 suit was filed against Moore by the Cachville Ditch Co., disputing Moore's claim to all the water that did flow or could flow in Cache Creek.

On Nov. 11, 1871, the local court decided against Moore. Moore appealed to the California Supreme Court which reversed to lower court and established Moore's claim, the result being that the Cachville Co. went out of business.

About 1908 a Mr. Highland spent $10,000 on a plan to build a dam on Kelsey Creek for the purpose of supplying water to the farmers of that area but when none were interested Mr. Highland dropped the idea with his $10,000. Later, when the Yolo County people were preparing to construct their present dam on Cache Creek, approached the Lake County Board of Supervisors, asking if Lake County was interested in the lake water.

Based on the experience of Mr. Highland, the answer was no. The Moore interests, which had been in the hands of the Moore family for nearly fifty years, during which time they had acquired the several other ditch Companies passed into the hands of the Yolo Water and Power Co. This latter company made application for 300,000 inches of water from Cache Creek, naming Clear Lake and all the streams flowing into the lake, this being recorded in the Lake County's Recorders office on May 28, 1912.

Through some oversight, Lake County never applied for water so thus the rights to the water passed to the Yolo County people.

So the irony... Tulare Lake used to be the largest fresh water lake in the state. Tulare Lake is GONE. Its now the Tulare basin, and is the home of industrial farming using TRINITY RIVER WATER. Why? Because Fresno farmers use all of the San Joaquin and Kings River water and there isn't enough left for a lake, much less farming.

So they stole Trinity River water from west of the crest, pipped it back under the Klamath Mountains and dump it into the Sacramento river, suck it back out in Bryon using fish kill pumps on a massive scale, plop that water into the Delta Mendota canal, for the purposes of using federally obtained water for private enterprise, make sense?

Hehe.

So Clear Lake is now the largest (remaining) fresh water lake in the state. And the people who live on its shore do not own the water their boats float in. That water belongs to Yolo farmers and there isn't sh#t all Lake County can do about it.

DMT

DMT
bobinc

Trad climber
Portland, Or
Oct 30, 2013 - 02:22pm PT
The investor-owned (private) utilities are regulated by public utility commissions; the latter follow state law but also have to answer to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Check out NARUC's website for plenty of info...
Brandon-

climber
The Granite State.
Oct 30, 2013 - 02:31pm PT
If they can't do so, why not?

bobinc

Trad climber
Portland, Or
Oct 30, 2013 - 02:44pm PT
One could make that conclusion, Chief. There is a non-zero possibility of that, I suppose, but the chance of it happening is virtually nil given all the repercussions of such a decision. I'm still unsure of the point you are trying to make.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 04:02pm PT
Um, about, er, 26 years ago?

DMT
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 04:20pm PT
I hear they're going to give up the military too, something about a 500 trillion dollar debt ceiling.

DMT
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 04:29pm PT
The English hired the Hessians in the Revolution. The Romans hired the Goths. Mercs are old as the hills and 'contracting it out' has always been the out for fat assed civilians. I don't accept it either.

Charlie don't surf.

DMT
wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Oct 30, 2013 - 07:14pm PT
"Appears no one has a viable and authentic answer for JL's question...."

Sure I do,but I was doing something you ,Chef ,are not familiar with,WORKING.

Largo,Let us start with the obvious,Solar.

Only in the last 6 years since Jimmy Carter was potus ,has it been subsidized.

Not nearly enough to get the ball rolling.YET.

Secondly,Wind,turbines,mills.[hardly subsidized]

And please do not tell me ,sometimes the wind does not blow.

If any of you have been near the Great Lakes you would know ,it screams daily,year around.

Third,Biofuels,diesel,and natural gas capture.[not subsidized]

Again ,do not tell me about ethanol,or corn derived fuels,they are just an excuse to take taxpayer money.Highly subsidized and as harmful to the planet as any out there.

Fourth,Battery development,fuel cell tech.The DOE has severely cut back on funding any of these programs.Right here in Honeoye Falls ,NY, we had a GM plant close last year .

That plant worked on Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology.Those were not floor sweeper jobs that were lost here.

Call it what you will[I know you will call it socialism],but that technology will be lost here in the states.Instead ,Japan will introduce the first hydrogen car ,and soon.

Look up "The Liquid Metal Battery".That will be a game changer for RENEWABLES.

There are others and they are not THEORIES.


Geo thermal is one ,small scale Hydro another.These are all industries ,both small and medium.

They have no significant lobbies in DC,nor the funding,or subsides of the "MACHINE" that is the FF industry.

So keep using federally subsidized FF's ,and be sure to call everyone a hypocrite ,or ,better yet a socialist.


SO THERE YOU ARE ,SHOOT EM' DOWN.
Messages 11121 - 11140 of total 21618 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews