Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 26441 - 26460 of total 27285 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
crankster

Trad climber
Jan 30, 2015 - 06:44am PT
The Deniers are losing as common sense takes over...

WASHINGTON — An overwhelming majority of the American public, including nearly half of Republicans, support government action to curb global warming, according to a poll conducted by The New York Times, Stanford University and the nonpartisan environmental research group Resources for the Future.

In a finding that could have implications for the 2016 presidential campaign, the poll also found that two-thirds of Americans say they are more likely to vote for political candidates who campaign on fighting climate change. They are less likely to vote for candidates who question or deny the science of human-caused global warming.

Among Republicans, 48 percent said they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports fighting climate change, a result that Jon A. Krosnick, a professor of political science at Stanford University and an author of the survey, called "the most powerful finding" in the poll. Many Republican candidates either question the science of climate change or do not publicly address the issue.

Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jan 30, 2015 - 06:53am PT
Devil would be in the details, for me. But generally speaking I suspect I am far more likely to vote against a person who makes denying climate change a platform plank.

In fact I'd guess it at 100%. But such a person will have many other platform issues for which I would also vote against.

DMT
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Jan 30, 2015 - 07:22am PT
Finally the truth is revealed. This is the underlying "Utopian" agenda. Just as the grains, vegies, fruits & stock animals that we are eating are mostly becoming "engineered", science is on the verge of stating that this method is the only real "quick" solution to the CAGW issue and saving mankind. May god help us....


What’s the right temperature for the Earth?

Imagine being able to control the temperature of the Earth like a home thermostat, turning it down a few notches to reduce the effects of global warming. That’s the goal of solar geoengineering. By spraying aerosols into the stratosphere, we could block a fraction of inbound sunlight and temporarily cool the Earth.

This more serious consideration is due in part to the realization that reducing carbon emissions won’t solve our climate problems; it can only stop things from getting worse. Put bluntly, if we miraculously stopped all CO2 emissions immediately, the Earth would keep warming for decades, and much of the CO2 emitted since the Industrial Revolution would remain in the atmosphere, altering the climate, for millennia. Even the so-called breakthrough climate agreements between the United States and China and at a global conference in Lima, Peru, last year commit the world to massive new quantities of greenhouse gases in the decades ahead, which will accelerate climate change.

And so attention is turning to solar geoengineering, also known as solar radiation management. Although the concept of injecting sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere has so far been tested only using computer simulations, there’s high confidence that it would work to cool the Earth because it would mimic the well-understood cooling effect of large volcanic eruptions. A gram of aerosol in the stratosphere, delivered perhaps by high-flying jets, could offset the warming effect of a ton of carbon dioxide, a factor of 1 million to 1. The tiny sulfate aerosols would stay up there, reflecting away a small amount of sunlight, for a year or two, so the material would need to be continually renewed for as long as the cooling effect was needed.

A consistent and growing body of evidence indicates that this technology would be fast-acting — reducing global temperatures immediately after deployment — and relatively cheap, costing an average of $1 billion a year over the next half century to cut the rate of warming in half.

The messy politics of geoengineering shouldn’t deter us from exploring it. It may be our best option for reducing climate risk until we get better control over greenhouse gas emissions. But the countries of the world will need to figure out how to manage its development prudently and equitably. We cannot wish the politics away.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-the-right-temperature-for-the-earth/2015/01/29/b2dda53a-7c05-11e4-84d4-7c896b90abdc_story.html
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Jan 30, 2015 - 08:55am PT
Most of the article talked, bluntly, of the consequences of deploying such geo-engineering. Geo-engineering actually gets compared to the invention of the atomic bomb.

Which in fact was developed and implemented by science with the exact same mindset and philosophy as geo-engineered climate control has in mind...

Quick remedy/solution to ending a potentially critical current human affecting issue. In the case of the Bomb, it was the horrific and massive killing of humans during war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.

I say that it will be a major topic of discussion of a highly possible quick solution to the CAGW issue in Paris.

bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Jan 30, 2015 - 08:58am PT
inflate-gate:

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/26/all-of-paraguays-temperature-record-has-been-tampered-with/#more-12774

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 30, 2015 - 09:02am PT
The "underlying utopian agenda" will never be achieved. It's a messy world out there, wildly divergent agendas by multiple different governments and factions. Power and greed are still the primary motivating factors. The agenda will be used as far as taxation and control of the populace will take it, but the utopians and there concerns will be jettisoned to the wayside. There has never been, nor ever will be a benevolent one world government whose high preists (modern scientismists) and officials work in concert for the salvation of nature and a reduced mankind. Does anyone here actually believe that the major emitters of CO2, China and India will torpedo their economies to satisfy western paranoia's, or Russua and Opec will leave their primary cash producing resource's in the ground, or for that matter the western world's populace will suffer quietly under ever increasing taxation, controls, and resultant increased poverty of the mainstream to the benefit of the few?

The new york times is a propaganda organ. The devil is in the detsils of its poll is putting it mildly. Not worth the electrons it takes to appear on your computer screen.
new world order2

climber
Jan 30, 2015 - 09:30am PT
Rick said...
There has never been, nor ever will be a benevolent one world government whose high preists (modern scientismists) and officials work in concert for the salvation of nature and a reduced mankind.

Rick, have you not ever heard of Agenda 21?
It's entire premise is to get us off the land, and into the cities, living in 300 sq. ft. apartments.
View this vid (Rick) to get an idea of the plans the elite/one world gov't have in store for us?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1422579428&x-yt-cl=85114404&v=P7rCAYkoMT0

To say there will never be a one world gov't is a bit of a stretch.
A new world order is just that, a one world government.
Bush senior speaks of it here....


Will you your RFID implant in your head, hand, or adze?
Office Implants Microchips Under Employees' Skin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1422579428&x-yt-cl=85114404&v=aDzabqO8g1E

The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Jan 30, 2015 - 09:31am PT
I hope you are right Rick, for the sake of the free world as a whole. Cus if this bullshet of geo-engineering the climate get's implemented, CC will be the last of the future generations worries.

Will you your RFID implant in your head, hand, or adze?

It's already here NWO. You don't need anything implanted if you have an Android phone or tablet.
new world order2

climber
Jan 30, 2015 - 09:35am PT
Tonnes of (mainstream media) links to climate geo-engineering.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30197085
Ideas include aircraft spraying out sulphur particles at high altitude to mimic the cooling effect of volcanoes.

http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/what-is-geoengineering/what-is-geoengineering/?
Stratospheric aerosols. Introducing small, reflective particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect some sunlight before it reaches the surface of the Earth.

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/372/2031#introduction

Climate engineering: exploring nuances and consequences of deliberatel...
Climate engineering: exploring nuances and consequences of deliberately altering the Earth's energy budget.
Credit: new world order2
Climate engineering over Yosemite
Climate engineering over Yosemite
Credit: new world order2
Oh look! There's a jet spraying chemicals into the atmosphere! <br/>
Lets ...
Oh look! There's a jet spraying chemicals into the atmosphere!
Lets see now...a jet spraying chemicals into the atmosphere would leave what in it's wake? Hmmmm...I dunno! Chemtrails? Nooooo....conspiracy theory!
Credit: new world order2


new world order2

climber
Jan 30, 2015 - 09:38am PT

It's already here NWO. You don't need anything implanted if you have an Android phone or tablet.

Indeed Chief, it is. But one can actually get the chip beneath their skin now.....

Office Implants Microchips Under Employees' Skin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1422579428&x-yt-cl=85114404&v=aDzabqO8g1E
Chewybacca

Trad climber
Montana, Whitefish
Jan 30, 2015 - 09:44am PT
Geo-engineering is what happens when you pump billions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year. Ignorance is denying that these greenhouse gases are a form of geoengineering.
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Jan 30, 2015 - 10:11am PT
So with that in mind CHEWY, you are now condoning that two wrongs will make it better?

Fact is all the fighting pollution shet has been around since the 60's. Was in full force in the 70's and working.


Then this scam shet of CAGW research came along in the late 80's (J Hansen's GISS etc) and guess what happened. Several smart scientists found a unique way to get more money for their research and off they were to the races. The IPCC was formed and off they went, vrooooooooooooom.

Meanwhile, air pollution got worse globally all while these 1000's of scientist are trying to prove their CAGW theories and getting paid more and more to do so.

Just another example of Rick S's post above.


Follow the money/funding game. Take a good look at the CC/CAGW research programs in the 80's compared to today. How many CC scientists/researchers were in operation globally in the late 80's compared to today.

Coincidence, don't think so.
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Jan 30, 2015 - 11:34am PT
Yes, it would seem a damn good idea to pay some scientists to figure out what effect this might have.

Ah, you mean like the 100's of scientist throughout the globe that Monsanto hires annually to design and implement more chemical shet to spray into the atmosphere and onto our foods that they say is ok to do? And the consensus of scientist agree there is nothing wrong with those operations.



Or the 1000's of scientists that have been hard at work for Big Oil the past 100 or so years doing the same as Monsanto.

You would think that science would take your philosophy to heart before it implements all the chemicals that it has done since the turn of last century. And continues doing so to this day. By the tons actually.

Doesn't make a lick a sense that science has been hard at work designing and implementing all these fuels and chemicals and NEVER took it into consideration to do any prior implementation analysis on what the effects would be in doing so.


Can't wait to read the retort/s that only those that do research analyzing the effects of all these chemicals that science has designed and implemented over the past century, are the real scientist. That all the 1000's of scientist that did all the research for them companies are not true scientists at all.

Yup, follow the money.

Oh the hypocrisy....
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Jan 30, 2015 - 11:43am PT
We've been spraying chemicals into the air, in large quantities, for 150 years. Currently, what, 20-30 billion tons of CO2 a year.

Upwards of 30 gigatons per year, and unlike these fantasies that geoengineering is really happening, right now. Along with so much other unintentional geoengineering from deforestation, soil erosion, or using ocean ecosystems as the ultimate sink. We're definitely changing the planet, heading in directions we won't like. Biologists have noted that "human-dominated ecosystems" are so ubiquitous now, it's hard to find the other kind.

As for the proposed geoengineering "solutions" to greenhouse warming, they look like bad ideas to me for many reasons, including (1) likely to bite back, perhaps drastically; (2) don't solve but excuse delayed action on the real problems; and (3) even if they worked perfectly as planned (which I doubt) it would be like taking heroin to cure your headache. If some geoengineering fix magically kept the atmosphere from frying our crops, we couldn't stop or pause ever.
crunch

Social climber
CO
Jan 30, 2015 - 11:46am PT
Ah, you mean like the 100's of scientist throughout the globe that Monsanto hires annually

No, I don't mean scientists working for corporations like Monsanto.

I mean scientists paid by universities and government laboratories, because they have independence and can go wherever their research takes them. They can publish whatever they find.

You do understand the difference?
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Jan 30, 2015 - 11:50am PT
See there it is Crunch.


Only those scientist that do the research and work that you and the others here agree with are true scientist. Right?


We're definitely changing the planet

Yup... you and your science sure did change the planet Chiloe. All and every bit of the chemicals and C02 you all are screaming about are all a product of... Science.

crunch

Social climber
CO
Jan 30, 2015 - 11:56am PT
Only those scientist that do the research and work that you and the others here agree with are true scientist. Right?

No. That's not what I said.
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Jan 30, 2015 - 11:58am PT
What are you saying then Crunch?

Are all them thousands of scientist that have been hard at work the past century designing them chemicals and fuels, are they not true scientists?

Yes or no.

Hell, take a good look at the evolution of the cigarette. All scientific research and design.

One of the most destructive polluting products on the planet, plastic, where did that come from? Oh shet.... scientific R&D.

And then there's the Atomic Weapon... all scientific R&D.
Roger Brown

climber
Oceano, California
Jan 30, 2015 - 12:03pm PT
Crunch,
:-)
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Jan 30, 2015 - 12:05pm PT
And currently science in delving into this...




Yup, good old science and it's ongoing R&D.
Messages 26441 - 26460 of total 27285 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews