Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 15401 - 15420 of total 17219 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 19, 2014 - 06:25pm PT
Cut The Chief some slack and be more tolerant....His reasoning skills have spiraled down ward ever since he started huffing welding rod...
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 19, 2014 - 07:12pm PT
http://www.thepiratescove.us/2014/11/19/if-all-you-see-1318/
Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Nov 19, 2014 - 07:50pm PT
So why does Red state America, predominantly lower class in economic status, always vote for the 1 percenters?

because the Three Gees motivate that class to vote Republican

God, Guns, and Gays
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 07:24am PT
Malemute, that this happened in Texas is amazing:

Publishers Pearson Education, WorldView Software and Studies Weekly Publications had already submitted to Texas education officials revisions to textbook passages that included inaccurate information about climate change. The original passages cast doubt on the overwhelming consensus among climate scientists that climate change is a real and growing threat and that human activity is the primary driver of the problem. Today publisher McGraw-Hill confirmed to the Texas Freedom Network (TFN) that it will remove a deeply problematic lesson that equated unsupported arguments from a special interest-funded political advocacy group, the Heartland Institute, with data-backed material from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a Nobel-winning organization of scientists from around the world.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 07:51am PT
Please do post when Northern Texas hasn't had "dry weather"?

Don't shoot the messenger here The Chief, but you have your head firmly up your a*#.




FluxAdventures

climber
Nov 20, 2014 - 07:56am PT
Very interesting topic, people have a lot to comment, however what are you really doing to change what is happening? example: I bet most people drive a v6 car or more... wake up, you don´t need that or to run your AC all day either.

http://www.fluxadventures.com
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 20, 2014 - 08:19am PT
Malemute, news of the starfishies' probs has generated massive celebrations amongst
shellfish populations!
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 09:09am PT
Sketch, you seem focused on polar bears. But are you giving us the whole story?

The truth about polar bears


Despite all this hedging, the numbers still tell a powerful story. It’s just not always clear what that story is. In Davis Strait, between Greenland and Baffin Island, the polar bear population has grown from 900 animals in the late 1970s to around 2,100 today. In Foxe Basin — a portion of northern Hudson Bay — a population that was estimated to be 2,300 in the early 2000s now stands at 2,570. And in specific areas of western Hudson Bay, the most-studied, most-photographed group of bears on Earth seems to have been on a slow but steady increase since in the 1970s.

News like this leaves climate-change deniers crowing from the rooftops. But a closer look reveals that everything may not be quite so sunny. “Some populations appear to be doing OK now, but what’s frightening is what might happen in the very near future,” says wildlife biologist Lily Peacock, who has worked with polar bears for the Government of Nunavut and the U.S. Geological Survey. “All indications are that the future does not look bright.” While population trends might appear stable, she says, “we’re picking up declines in body condition that are really frightening.” Scientists have shown a direct correlation between warm years and skinny bears. Even more distressing, one study predicted that 40 to 73 percent of pregnant females could fail to deliver healthy cubs if ice breakup happens one month earlier than in the 1990s. Polar bears are long-lived animals that reproduce slowly; counting the number of animals that are alive today might not paint an accurate picture.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 12:00pm PT
I was just providing some current details ...

How come your "current details" cover only the denier POV?

Is that because you are denying the overwhelming body of facts that show AWG is a real and present danger?


!~~~!

In other news ...

I'm in a country that almost elected George W. Bush two times. That’s quite a charge against any nation. Even if he did steal both elections, he came close to winning. He got almost half the country.

That's not easy to explain and it does us no credit as a country and frankly it means that the chance that we will dig ourselves out of this hole of war, bad economy, unemployment, and climate, and help the world take on those things, is very small. We can do what we can and we should do it despite knowing that the actual chance of success is not high. And when I talk about success, I’m talking about survival of the species - the survival of our civilization.

As Noam Chomsky said recently, we're in the twilight of civilization. It must be hyperbolic, but it isn’t. There's a very high chance of climatic catastrophe, which ends urban civilization and large populations. It means a huge deal in the next century. By huge, I mean most humans. It could not be more serious. It could not be overstated. Yet this country and other countries are acting in total denial, as if those problems are entirely trivial. This species and this country and this civilization are in bad shape and we're not showing signs of a willing to do anything to avert catastrophe. And yet the challenge is there.

Whistleblowers have mostly not had an impact on policy, but sometimes they have. Movements have generally not succeeded, but sometimes they have. The stakes, being what they are, are definitely worth someone's life, many lives, to try and change the process.
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Nov 20, 2014 - 12:41pm PT
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 01:30pm PT
Why do you always want to turn every exchange into a stupid pissing match?

Not a pissing match at all Sketch. I just made an observation, and you seem to be overreacting.

Hmm...

I also provided recent data, and one that isn't media hype or overblown sensationalism. And while it bolstered what you posted, it went a bit farther into the topic.

That often happens, your reaction when folks point out your true colors. I see it here and on the Politard threads. You try so hard to disguise your POV by carefully avoiding any statements that can be construed as your opinion. Yet 99% of your posts on this thread have the same slant--climate change denier.

If the shoe fits, wear it.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 01:39pm PT
Well The Chief, nice research.

And it looks like you answered your own question: Please do post when Northern Texas hasn't had "dry weather"?

From your charts, Nov. 2004 seemed to be a normally wet year.


So now you have your head up your a*# for asking questions to which you already knew how to find the answer.

Bravo.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 20, 2014 - 02:04pm PT
Because you're always an as#@&%e....
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 02:15pm PT
Why do you always have to be an assh0le?

I'm just a pain to you Sketch, because (as Wade says) you are always an asshOle.


Go back and read your own posts, then report back on what you see.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 02:24pm PT
I was just providing some current details ...

How come your "current details" cover only the denier POV?

Is that because you are denying the overwhelming body of facts that show AWG is a real and present danger?

Why do you always have to be an assh0le?


This is me being an as#@&%e? Sketch sure has some thin skin for one who goes around calling folks names all the time.

How's this one fit Sketch: sissy
Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Nov 20, 2014 - 02:48pm PT
What present danger are you talking about? Crop decline?

in fact, yes

just one year ago the extreme heat and draught throughout the grain belt caused the prices
to rise to all time historic high levels

so, yes, but why could you not already know that, or why could you not have looked it up yourself?
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 03:41pm PT
One year out of the last 14 is "normal".

Is that what you get from looking at the charts you posted? What about Nov. 2010--North Texas looked OK there too.

Now about the point you were trying to make--wondering when North Texas wasn't dry.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2014 - 03:42pm PT
What part of the quote I posted indicates a "denier POV"? Aside from the point about media hype, ...

It seems that you don't even know what you posted Sktech.

Your post was only a quote (with emphasis added by you), there was no other comment from you, including anything about media hype.

To refresh your memory from a couple of hours ago, here's the sentence you highlighted:

US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) fall survey of Southern Beaufort polar bears in 2012 found numbers were higher than they had been in a decade.


Nothing about media hype, unless you want to mix and match posts to make some dumbass point.
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Nov 20, 2014 - 03:59pm PT
We've been over the effects of global warming on crop production before--there are some "studies" that suggest GW will reduce crop yields. Seems a little inconsistent with NASA's projections that biomass will increase, but whatever.
Probably based on silly things like not considering that farmers will adjust crops to optimize current growing conditions.
But anyone who thinks that a little warmer weather + more CO2 is going to lead to dramatic declines in world agricultural output is smoking something better than what I can get my hands on here in Colorado, and that's saying something.
The drought stuff is mostly made up fear mongering a la Al Gore. Remember the warmists would have us believe that every (bad) weather feature is casued by GW: it's getting hotter/colder/wetter/dryer ALL AT THE SAME TIME!!!!) Who really believes that crap?
Think about it logically:
They would have you believe: cold places will get colder
hot places will get hotter
wet places will get wetter
dry places will get dryer.
But what about places that are not particularly hot or cold or wet or dry (i.e., where most people live). Seems like we could be in for some good times there!
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Nov 20, 2014 - 04:06pm PT
Tell you what wont be a god damned coincidence; if these doomist morons get there way enough to decarbonize to the point industry, transportation, and crop planting/harvest collapses and a great many people suffer as a consequence.

Cant we preempt these idiots befire they manage to manufacture a catastrophe?

Messages 15401 - 15420 of total 17219 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta