Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: There's No such thing as global warming!

Posted 2 years ago on March 20, 2012, 10:15 p.m. EST by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Unprecedented, "Eye-Popping" Temperatures Soar, Highs Continue Climate scientist: "This is to me the most unusual weather event I've witnessed in my lifetime."

  • Common Dreams staff People from the Midwest and Northeast have been stepping out to record-setting temperatures this month. Meteorologists are calling the temperatures unprecedented.

Deke Arndt, who leads the climate monitoring branch of the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., said, “This will be a March event that we’ll look back on as one of the big March events of modern history.” And Jonathan Martin, chairman of atmospheric and oceanic sciences at UW-Madison, adds, "This is to me the most unusual weather event I've witnessed in my lifetime."

Weather maps show many areas with temperatures at 30 degrees above normal days in a row.

Andrew Freedman: Climate Central Historic March Heat Wave Sets New Milestones

The March heat wave continues to shatter longstanding records from the Upper Midwest to the Northeast, with more than 2,200 warm temperature records set during the month so far. It’s quite possible that this March heat wave will be considered an unprecedented event in the U.S. historical record, which extends back to the late 19th century, based on the margin by which records are being exceeded, the wide geographic scope of the heat wave, the duration of the event and the time of year when it is occurring.

“This will be a March event that we’ll look back on as one of the big March events of modern history,” said Deke Arndt, who leads the climate monitoring branch of the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C.. “If it’s not unprecedented, it’s definitely very impressive.”

According to the HAMweather website, 1,192 record daytime highs were set in the U.S. from March 12-18, along with 708 high minimum temperature records. This compares to just 66 coldest maximum temperature records, and only eight records for the coldest overnight low temperature. More records are likely to be set today through the end of this week, when a cooler airmass finally moves eastward (as it does so, it may spark rounds of severe weather). This data may be missing some records set after March 15, since there have been some problems obtaining data from the National Climatic Data Center's website.

According to the CapitalClimate blog, so far this month warm weather records have been outpacing cold records by a lopsided ratio of 19-to-1. Since January 1, the ratio has been closer to 14-to-1.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/03/20-5

This climate change could be a death nell for the species. How is it that we cant get any action on it?

132 Comments

132 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

there's no profits to be made, that's why. our noble leaders, financial and political, have no real incentive. as if saving our own asses isn't worth something. : (

[-] 2 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Yeah, I know. It was a rhetorical question really.

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 2 years ago

Yeah. No one has made a dime selling carbon credits or alternative energy projects :(

[-] 1 points by Quark3 (54) 2 years ago

It is not Global Warming but "Global Weirding". This means that the usual pattern of weather is drastically different all over the world. It is a fact that Global Weirding is occuring & it is not debatable. It is incontrovertible. The real question is how long can 9 billion people live on a planet with Global Weirding.

[-] 1 points by Quark2 (109) 2 years ago

The rich will live on & the poor will die. It is exactly what the 1% want.

[-] 1 points by Spade2 (478) 2 years ago

No we don't, Jesus I can't believe you think that.

[-] 1 points by Umair (24) 2 years ago

I don't believe in people that don't believe in global warming because they are not people as they yet to evolve into what most scientists call Homo sapiens. So if I don't believe in these people and I am smart enough to believe in global warming, I can just stay ignorant in those companies and people that don't. There is not profit because not enough people care enough to put their money where their hearts are.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

Autumn was born on the equinox

so here is my solstice bit

.

alone in my room

while daylight sprawl the hours of the day

the suns arc straddles the sky

and still am I inside my room

silent as a stone

the days are always longest before the summer dawn

[-] 0 points by farmerbrown (-3) 2 years ago

Global warming being the greatest catastrophe in human history and time fast running out what, exactly, are the US government's current plans to deal with it?

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

One of the things that hasn't been mentioned with regard to the higher temperatures is that the axis of the earth has changed by about 12 degrees.

Meaning that the earth has tilted more, and the magnetic north pole has moved by about 120 or so miles. It isn't where it used to be.

Think maybe this could be causing temperature changes?

[-] 2 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

No I dont and could you provide a scientific paper that states the same information? The science behind global warming has been widely accepted for over 150 years. Denialists are the same as people who do not belive in evolution because it is only a theory. Which is the same as saying that I dont believe in gravity because its only a theory.

[-] 2 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

What do you mean it changed 12 degrees? It is constantly changing. It takes 26,000 years to complete a cycle.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

The 12 degree shift is not true. Historically, the tilt in Earth's axis, varies between 22.5 and 24 degrees during a cycle of 41,000 years.

[-] -1 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

Here's several links about it -

The cause of earths 23 degree tilt

http://www.grantchronicles.com/astro138.htm

Earths axis tilt

http://www.divulgence.net/axis%20shift%202.html

The Capture theory of the moon

http://www.grantchronicles.com/astro11.htm

The magnetic north pole shift

http://imaginativeworlds.com/forum/showthread.php?16365-Magnetic-North-Pole-Shift-The-Tilting-Earth-Climate-Change

Read it and then tell me what you think.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

"It's been very interesting to see elders and hunters across Nunavut make the same observation about the world having shifted on its axis. In most cases, research participants were not prompted on the issue, yet they began talking about it. Just today, we heard from another interviewee that "the earth has tilted", and Zach looked and me and jokingly said "did you tell him?". As a trained scientist, I know that a key test for "truth" is the repeated replicability of a research finding, independent of who is doing the test. Hearing Inuit across Nunavut make the same observation, using their traditional ecological knowledge, seems to pass this credo for scientific truth. So what data are elders collecting and analyzing to draw this conclusion?"

If these kinds of fairy tales are what you consider proof, I am sorry that our educational system has failed you so completely. An Axis shift of the earth would correspond to the stars changing their relative position in the sky... this has not happened. It's nice to hear that the Inuits believe the earth's axis has shifted, but scientific observational data does not support this. The North Star Polaris- has not moved 12 degrees in the sky since records have been kept. Any amateur astronomer knows this and would detect such a change. It's preposterous.

The Earths magnetic field has flipped many times over the past 300 million years. Non of the flips have coincided with global climate events, or major extinction events like the Permian-Triassic extinction. It takes about 10,000 years or more for a reversal of location to take place.

I read all of your links. They are a mixture of partial truths with outright fantasy.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Excellent point,however the Alarmists can't very well spin that into some sort of "tilt tax" and outlaw SUV's because they put too much weight on the world and disrupt the balance,or can they?

[-] 2 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

Earth always has the same mass no matter how many SUVs there are.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Wow,that's amazing. Now do have any more information on how much that "Tilt tax" will be?

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

you ignore realities you don't want to deal with?

[-] 0 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

I may not be a "the human race killed the planet alarmist". But I do not remember a March like this, I have no problem with the climate warming or cooling, It is that man cause this I have a problem with. There is to much government money and politics in Science anymore that you can not trust them like you use too.

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

There is plenty of money in cancer research and AIDs research, yet I don't hear the whining over the involvement of politics.

The problem that most people have with AGW is the implications that the research brings to our policies... therefore they choose to diss the science instead of taking a long hard look at their own lifestyles.

AID's? Oh thats just with Gays... doesn't affect me. Cancer, especially Breast Cancer.... nah doesn't affect me either. All that is required is that I throw a few dimes in the collection basket when it gets passed. AGW doesn't go away that easily and requires more responsibility from individuals. That changes peoples comfort levels.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

yes, that is the exact point of mental brake-down with these people who are just unwilling to see reality. they just can not imagine that much change and so they cling to 'the way it was'. sad.

[-] -1 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

it's been , in the northeast, a warmer than usual winter.,..............so? last year was freezing. it was still winter, not spring nor autumn , not summer. i still needed to have the heat on.

[-] -1 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

because,................................it's a scam. weather varies, temperatures vary not matter what the season. there have been cool summers,............so what.

[-] -1 points by jewieboy (1) 2 years ago

81 in Chicago today and this is still March Right you dumbass

[-] 2 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Was the dumbass directed at me? Because the title of the post was meant to be ironic. I'm a firm beliver in AGW.

[-] -2 points by jewieboy (1) 2 years ago

Yea it was isn't it ironic don't ya think yea a little bit ironic and I really do think Listen to Alanis Morrisette

[-] -2 points by leonardsova (-24) 2 years ago

Poor Al Gore (also the inventor of the internet!!! he claims) had to put a halt on construction of mansion number five, when climate gate broke. Sure put a damper on his Global warming scam o rama

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

one guy,. that is so lame,. . al is just a guy, the actual atmosphere we all live in, is a tad more than one guy, or his opinion.

[-] -2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Global sea level has steadily risen 1/8" per year for the past century. If climate change was true, sea level would be increasing at 1/4" or more per year with the increased industrial pollution of the last 40 years.

[-] 2 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Yes, yes I'm sure you have a much better grasp on the situation than 97% of climate scientists. You should write the IPCC and tell them about your little observation. It will blow the doors off of 153 years of scientific research.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

What is the most compelling evidence that confirms your belief in climate change?

[-] 2 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

melting polar ice, what could be more obvious? soon there will be a northwest passage from alaska to greenland.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

The Geologic Record provides the most compelling evidence. Temperatures are increasing at a rate unheard of in the last 300 Million years. If you have specific questions regarding this you can ask as I have no desire to write a book on the subject here.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

The most compelling thing that comes to mind is the fact that between 1993 and 2003 there wasnt a single peer reviewed paper that disputed the fact that man made global warming is real. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full

And the fact that the insurance industry has realized that because of global warming they are going to lose alot of money because the catastrophic natural disasters. http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1013/p01s01-usec.html

But nevermind that, just look at the news if you want proof of global warming. Last year was I think one of the most expensive years ever recorded for natural disasters. Its not an abstract anymore its in the news everyday. So, keep denying the facts if you want and to be honest it might not even matter because it could be too late. The tipping point may have already passed and the large methane stores in siberia could already be realeasing millions of tons of methane into the atmosphere. When that happens there isnt any amount of green tech that will save us . In fact this may end up being the pinnacle of human civilization because after this point is when the shit hits the fan.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

You did not provide any evidence. Do you have any? Natural disasters have always occurred and will increase due to population growth. Here are two sea level charts: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

I kinda feel embarrassed for you now.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Oh my god did you even read that llink you posted? I shouldnt have dissmissed it because it only supports my argument. From the link.

Sea level rise is one of several lines of evidence that support the view that the climate has recently warmed.[8] It is likely that human-induced (anthropogenic) warming contributed to the sea level rise observed in the latter half of the 20th century.[9]

Sea level rise is expected to continue for centuries.[10] In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projected that during the 21st century, sea level will rise another 18 to 59 cm (7.1 to 23 in), but these numbers do not include "uncertainties in climate-carbon cycle feedbacks nor do they include the full effects of changes in ice sheet flow".[11] Although IPCC explicitly refrained from projecting an upper limit of total sea level rise in the 21st century, one meter of sea level rise is well within the range of more recent projections.[11][12]

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

The very first thing we learned in my college science courses was that it was unacceptable to cite wikipedia. The site is just not reliable. You need to go on google scholar and then come back with a citation and then we can talk.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

What do you want? Peer reviewed scientific papers? Why dont you prove to me your little statment above about sea change? Do you have any proof of that?

[-] 0 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

If manmade global warming is occurring, the polar ice caps should be melting at an exponentially increasing rate, with a corresponding rise in sea level. The evidence shown by the gradual and steady rise of global sea levels does not support the theory of man- made global warming. At the current rate, sea level is rising about one foot per century.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

False again. The ice in the North Pole is sea ice... which when melted does not add to the volume of water the ocean. The north polar ice is indeed melting at an alarming rate. The Northwest Passage is now ice free for the first time in recorded history.

The steady rise in sea level is from the thermal expansion of the oceans as they heat. Once the freshwater glaciers start to melt in earnest the rise will then become exponential.

[-] 1 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

the ice caps ARE MELTING.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Ok lets see your scientific peer reviewed paper.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Let's see yours. You are the one making the claim.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Here's one from 1975 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/189/4201/460.short

The journal of climate in 2006 http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JCLI3990.1

The effect of global warming on tropical storm intensity.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7051/full/nature03906.html

Sorry it took so long but I actually go over the citations that I use. To be honest there is a mountain of this information online in google scholar and in other places. Its easy to find studies that support global warming because it is widely accepted in the scientific community as fact. Just like evolution and gravity are accepted as fact. You are the victim of a very well financed propaganda drive.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Those links require a payment to read the articles. Please provide the most compelling free link that supports your view.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Read the abstracts they are like a summary of the paper. If you had clue one about scientific research you would know this. Only about 40 or 30% of articles are going to be free and besides the one from the journal of climate is free so read it. Its getting late and I have to be at school tomorrow. If you want to continue this it will have to be when I have free time again.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Abstracts of a few paragraphs do not give enough information to come to any conclusion. The journal of climate link does not work.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

jrhirsch - you are the one asking for proof of something the vast majority of interested people have already shown. You are the one that needs to go look it up if you have something new to add.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

No, there numbers of papers is of little interest, however since you bring it up, the denialists loose this one by large.

Sea level rise is a side issue, and in this case perhaps a Chewbacca defense., Temperature would be a better indicator of global warming. Lots of unknown volumes of ice vs water, and pressures and state change,. with sea level measure.

[-] 0 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Demian did not provide a single argument supporting his view. Just links to abstracts. There are hundreds of peer reviewed reports on both sides of the argument. I am on neither side. The rate of sea level rise has been steady at 3mm per year for the last century. If global warming is occuring, the rate of sea level rise should be increasing, but it is not. The most reliable indicator of global warming is the rate of sea level rise. If there is a better one please let me know.

[+] -5 points by DKAtoday (26862) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Look up one of ZenDog's old postings - Watching the demise of the Columbia Ice Glacier. Lots of good stuff in that post. Vid charts articles lots of good stuff.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Look at my link above. Then check all of the charts on the internet that show sea level change for the last 100 years. I have looked at dozens and they are all relatively similar. Also look at the charts that go back 20,000 plus years. Sea level has risen 400 feet since the last ice age. Without help from man.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

I did look at your link above and it didnt help your argument very much.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Sea level has risen 400 feet on the last 20,000 years. This was determined by science. Our recent sea level rise is microscopic in comparison. How can global warming occur but not melt enough polar ice to raise sea levels more than 3mm per year?

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

And how can you use a link that is the opposite of the argument you are trying to make? You're out of your league buddy you better quit while your ahead. You've already embarrassed yourself with the link. I'm sure there is a community college somewhere in sun city I suggest you enroll in a few science courses before you come on here and try and make scientific arguments. Besides you arent providing any evidence of what you are saying. The only thing you did provide is a citation that actually hinders your argument. Its pretty obvious you have no idea what you are talking about.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

The evidence is the sea level rise over the last 100 years. About one foot.

Show your evidence.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Are you trolling?

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Just because I support occupy does not mean I must also believe in global warming. I asked for evidence for your belief and received none. If global warming is occurring, then sea level should be rising faster. Instead it rises steadily at 1 foot per century,

[-] -2 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

No "death knell" here. Natural cycles are occuring. Deal with it.

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

so human activity has nothing to do with the changes in the planet?

[-] 2 points by elf3 (2669) 2 years ago

you'll be saying that I'm sure when the gulf stream ceases to bring warm air north to the US (due to all the fresh water interupting the currents in the ocean from the ice caps melting) and we have a massive ice age that prevents us from growing crops anymore - don't worry we'll eat you first

[-] -1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

You just keep right on panicking...

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

You keep telling yourself that if thats what helps you sleep at night.

[-] -1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

China and India now pollute more than any country in the West. So how are you panicky asshats going to get them to change?

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Overpopulation! Global warming! We're all gonna die. Stop driving cars! Cover the land with windmills! Stop coal energy! Aaaaaaggghhhh!!!!! Get bent Reds.

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

giant objects wiz by at lethal velocities

we call them cars

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

wow, the same learning disabled fools trot out their endless growth myths at the drop of a hat,. imagine that.

[-] -3 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

"This climate change could be a death nell for the species. How is it that we cant get any action on it?"

Because it is the biggest hoax perpetrated on mankind ever and a lot of people have gotten wise to the lie. Deal with it.

[-] 4 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

Time will tell my delusional friend. I predict a very unusual summer.

[-] -3 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Delusion is believing mankind can actually change the climate of the earth in any direction and believing mankind can tax humanity into a balanced,temperate Utopia.

[-] 3 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

What you describe as delusion is a proven scientific fact. I have never been a proponent of cap and trade so go play that song somewhere else.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

Man can not change the planet? Do you live in a vacuum? You must not be from around here.. ,

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Maybe you should read the post again and work on your comprehension skills.

[-] 3 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Maybe you're an idiot and everyone should stop talking to you. Actually, wait, no. This just in. You're definitely an idiot. And nobody cares what you think. Have a nice day, Mr. Exxon.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

Your post; "Delusion is believing mankind can actually change the climate of the earth in any direction", it appears to me you are a faith-head, who chooses to believe myth, and pretend that is reality. I see that as a sad escapist position from weak-mined folks too afraid of change to even bother understanding the current situation. Am I wrong? Do you have some info. the rest of us don't have yet? Or does all your 'info' come from ancient mythological books?? Mind you I am not an proponent of any of the 'solutions' on offer from the 1% politicians, however that does not stop me from accepting the obvious facts about the state of out atmosphere, as it appears it does you.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

What IS obvious is the Alarmist's,propagandist's agenda to tax,rob and pillage the USA in the name of the greatest hoax on earth: "Climate Change". You are a useful Idiot in as much as you are helping to perpetrate the Myth by trying your very best everyday to try and convince as many people as you can of this Man-Made Global Hoaxing.

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

So no, you have no additional info. to support views? You are just going to keep yelling that what most of us can see, feal and confirm with actual real world measurements, is not reality, because you say it's not?? That is the whole of your argument? Just 'I say so'?? You are clinging to a dying system and convincing no one of your fantasy and denial. Get a clue.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

You're completely propagandized,so I don't feel a need to waste anymore time trying to tell you the obvious and if you think I'm the only one who believes as I do then you truly are a Drone.

[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (26862) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

F ix

O r

R epair

D aily

3/4 ton.

Blind marching supporter of the fossil fuel industries.

There is a way that can prove conclusively whether or not man contributes to global warming. Which we "are" experiencing.

Vastly reduce our pollution output by implementing more green technology.

This will also reduce our dependence on fossil fuel make our air cleaner to breath and our water safer to drink our food safer to grow and eat our fresh water fish and seafood safer to eat.

This will break the strangle hold fossil fuel has on the world. It wont end markets for oil or it's byproducts as used in plastics and what-not. But it will break the captive market hold on fuel and power.

No more eggs all in one basket.

[-] -1 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

You're just as ignorant about Ford trucks as you are about everything else concerning your pet issue. A good Green Utopian like you must surely drive a Leaf,correct?

[+] -5 points by DKAtoday (26862) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I had a 2002 Honda Insight - Gas electric hybrid. My worst gas mileage city or freeway rush hour stop and go driving was 45mpg. My best gas mileage was cruising on the freeway at 65mph I was getting over 60mpg. Much of the driving was electric assist and the system recharged while coasting or braking the motor (gas) turned off at stops and started when foot was lifted off of the brake. This stuff should be used in all cars and trucks, while we move towards hydrogen fuel cell implementation. The charging system for the battery was also powered by the gas engine when the battery charge dropped low when driving. So the electric assist was always available even while the battery was on a charge cycle..

Green Tech.

This is where we should be going: Green Energy we have the technology we just need to use it. This is what I am talking about. A clean future to be implemented NOW!

http://www.hopewellproject.org/

http://ecat.com/

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/all/1

FuelCell Energy http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/progress_alerts.cfm/pa_id=600

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Well,they can't take your dreams from you.

Oil/gas powered vehicles are going to be around for a long time.

Again you don't have a clue,until someone can run a 1 ton full sized Pickup or SUV with the same amount of horsepower generally speaking 300-500HP and there's no sacrifice in cargo/room and power,the free market (you disdain) will not buy it or make it a success.

There is a whole other world that doesn't like or drive little cars and little trucks for many logistic and personal reasons/needs. These are the people that people like you discount and spit upon with arrogance while telling them they have to change their lifestyle and vehicle choices for some hoax,that wants to tax and burn the prosperity of the country.

No thanks.

[-] 3 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

You haven't offered a single shred of factual evidence to support your utterly preposterous position. And that's because it isn't out there. Search high and low, Mr. Exxon, the only support you'll find is in the Bible and some asshole's ridiculous "sunspot" theory. You're either a shill for big oil or one of the stupidest human beings every produced on Earth. And no, I will not post yet more of the preponderance of evidence amassed on this topic over decades of dedicated research, the burden of proof is on you, chuckles. You have to put up or shut up. I'm guessing shut up is your best policy.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Again,get bent Proglodyte. I won't debate with a propagandized Drone with a mind closed like a steal trap.

[-] 2 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

"Again,get bent Proglodyte. I won't debate with a propagandized Drone with a mind closed like a steal trap."

Thanks for proving my point, Mr. The Bible Told Me So.

Go suck on an oil well.

[-] 0 points by Quark3 (54) 2 years ago

Wrong. The Air Force just bought 450,000 gallons of Biofuel. The world is changing fast. In a decade or less we could be buying Biofuel for our cars.

[-] 0 points by Quark3 (54) 2 years ago

It is a FACT & a incontrovertible FACT.

The Air Force just bought 450,000 gallons of Biofuel!

[-] -1 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Extremely doubtful.

[-] -2 points by DKAtoday (26862) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

There are gas electric hybrid buses. So I think they can manage the same tech in a pick-up. Electric assist motors ( electric motors in general ) have a lot of power and torque, and it would not be a big thing for a gasoline engine to burn Hydrogen instead.

Pull your head out. There is much that can be done that is not because of fossil fuel interests and manipulations.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

nope

demanding fiefs from regions won't fix the environment

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

man can not fix the environment,the environment does that on it's own,man can only clean up but not make alterations to climate

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

life is a capable of changing the environment

some 3.5 billion years ago

In my book Death from the Skies!, I described Earth’s first mass extinction event: the evolution of bacteria that were able to ingest the primitive atmosphere of the time, and excrete oxygen. To these little beasties, oxygen was a lethal poison, and when enough accumulated in the atmosphere, it killed off a lot of our planet’s nascent life. They couldn’t survive their own waste (and, as I point out in the book, take home whatever cautionary tale from that you like). The survivors were ones who could use this new molecule to their advantage.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/03/21/when-did-earths-oxygen-atmosphere-appear/

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Quit confusing them with reality. You know they think the Worlds only a couple of thousands of years old.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

You should move to LA, or Beijing.

Yes we can affect climate.

Tell me one natural system we've messed with, that we didn't mess up.

[-] -3 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Those are localized issues that are in constant flux,not a global climate transformation.

You should take your own advice but you'd be much happier in North Korea. There,the Govt. runs everything (just like you want) and most people don't own or drive evil polluting cars.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

So come on, smarty pants.

Name the natural system we've messed with that we didn't mess.

You underestimate mankind's abilities.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Well,I surely don't underestimate your inability to make a comprehensive statement or question.

"smarty pants"? You're shitting me right?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

I shit you not...................smarty pants.

Name it! If you can.

[-] -3 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Again,(comprehension issues seem common with you Lefties) what the hell are you asking me?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Getting lost in conversation, and an inability to remember very much, is a common problem for of the wrong wing (R)epelican'ts.

I've already asked it twice, in this thread alone. You're failure to respond is telling.

The comprehension problem is yours alone.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Grammar check will ya?

"Tell me one natural system we've messed with, that we didn't mess up."

If this is the question to which you're referring to,my only answer is: mankind fucks up a lot of things but you seem to forget how well nature heals itself. Remember what happens after an oil spill?....the Sea takes care of most of the oil all on its own.

Your Alarmist,sky is falling beliefs are much to do about nothing except the advancement of the Progressive and Leftist freedom stealing and money robbing agenda. Which is nothing new.

[-] 3 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

I think saying that something won't happen because it has not happened, is really reckless on your part. The sea, like any ecosystem, can only absorb so much pollutants before the whole thing is off kilter, take over exposure to phosphates in aquatic habitats they are decimated when a certain chemical reaches a certain point.

To assume that our meddling in natural systems is inconsequential because nature has been know to erase our blunders in the past, is blind to the realities of our evolution and technological advancement. We are not your great grand pappy's Industrial revolution, we've proliferated beyond those inconsequential confines.

Also, your certainty that global warming is a hoax, has me wondering how many right wing hoaxes have you perpetrated to be so confident everyone is doing it.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Saying something is going to happen with absolute certitude that requires industries to be destroyed and whole economic infrastructures to be devastated while nations are taxed into submission all in the name of prevention of something nobody can with 100% assurance predict will be successful,even IF it is a reality,is beyond reckless,it's criminal and supporters of this should be eventually convicted and tried as such.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

All that typing and you still couldn't answer the question.

There's lots of places on the Planet messed up by oil, and it's extraction, including parts of the ocean.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Open a physics book. Ever hear of the physicist Svante Arrhenius? He is one of the fathers of AGW. In 1896 he exclaimed after his observations on CO2 that 'we are evaporating our coal mines into the air".. he then went on to calculate the effects of such anthropogenic contributions of CO2 to the atmosphere.

Svante Arrhenius, 1896b, 'On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground', London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science (fifth series), April 1896. vol 41, pages 237–275. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/1/18/Arrhenius.pdf

"That the atmospheric envelopes limit the heat losses from the planets had been suggested about 1800 by the great French physicist Fourier. His ideas were further developed afterwards by Pouillet and Tyndall. Their theory has been styled the hot-house theory, because they thought that the atmosphere acted after the manner of the glass panes of hot-houses." (p51)

"If the quantity of carbonic acid in the air should sink to one-half its present percentage, the temperature would fall by about 4°; a diminution to one-quarter would reduce the temperature by 8°. On the other hand, any doubling of the percentage of carbon dioxide in the air would raise the temperature of the earth's surface by 4°; and if the carbon dioxide were increased fourfold, the temperature would rise by 8°." (p53)

"Although the sea, by absorbing carbonic acid, acts as a regulator of huge capacity, which takes up about five-sixths of the produced carbonic acid, we yet recognize that the slight percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere may by the advances of industry be changed to a noticeable degree in the course of a few centuries." (p54)

"Since, now, warm ages have alternated with glacial periods, even after man appeared on the earth, we have to ask ourselves: Is it probable that we shall in the coming geological ages be visited by a new ice period that will drive us from our temperate countries into the hotter climates of Africa? There does not appear to be much ground for such an apprehension. The enormous combustion of coal by our industrial establishments suffices to increase the percentage of carbon dioxide in the air to a perceptible degree." (p61)"

Svante Arrhenius, 1908, "Das Werden der Welten", Academic Publishing House, Leipzig, 208 pages.

It can be found online here to read in English: http://books.google.com/books?id=1t45AAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 2 years ago

1896? I thought he did that earlier than 1896?

[-] 0 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Ruining the economy of the US and the world based on over 100 yr old science is delusional.

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-wrong.php

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Funny in biology and medicine we do exactly that. In those fields we have made great strides in our understanding over the last 100 years, the same with physics, and AGW.

Running the world economy and the US's on principles that don't encompass the philosophy of sustainability is delusional.

[-] 1 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

That word was R-u-i-n-i-n-g Ruining not running.

Apparently you haven't heard about the trillions of barrels of domestic shale/oil that is recoverable with a sustainability of at least 200 yrs. But that wouldn't fit your "green" agenda and narrative.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

I meant it as running... definitely not ruining.

So, are you talking about the Green River Formation Shale in Utah and Wyoming? I hope not. You see, then your narrative and agenda would be wrong.... "Trillions of barrels of domestic shale/oil that is recoverable"?

According to the 2011 USGS "Assessment of In-Place Oil Shale Resources of the Green River Formation, Greater Green River Basin in Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah"... that is all fairy dust:

"No attempt was made to estimate the amount of oil that is economically recoverable because there has not yet been an economic method developed to recover the oil from Green River Formation oil shale"

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2011/3063/pdf/FS11-3063.pdf

That is the only site in the domestic US where Trillions of barrels of oil/shale have been discovered that I know of.... and I'm a geologist.

[-] 1 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

Profit ratio is too low for private companies to drill it. They need billions in subsidies and tax rebates to continue to sell it at a price that won't crash the economy. The market is broken. It is unsustainable.

[-] 1 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

the earth, believe it or not, is a finely tuned mechanism and slight changes to that mechanism bring surprising results.

[-] 1 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

this planet can and has withstood massive volcanic eruptions and earthquakes. human beings and their activities ( like using internal combustion engines) are nothing compared to those natural events. humans cannot stop earthquakes or volcanoes.

[-] 1 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

yes, and it has killed off countless species. when people talk about saving the planet they actually mean saving the environmental conditions that we evolved under, in other words saving our asses. we really don't know how much pollution in the atmosphere and the water cycle the earth can take and remain hospitable to our species. you should take some science courses and then decide. knowledge is mandatory when discussing scientific matters.

[-] 0 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

so,.................was it human produced pollution that killed off the dinosaurs? dinosaurs lived all over the planet. what killed off the saber tooth tigers? the mammoths? the earths climate actually fluctuates between ice ages and warm periods. ther have 4-6 ice ages. the first ice age was about 2.1 billion years ago. the "little ice age" was from 1400-1800.

[-] 2 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

for the last 200 years humans have been steadily releasing pollutants into the atmosphere at ever increasing rates, there have been no volcanoes erupting steadily or increasing their eruptions at a steady rate for 200 years. you can hide your head in the sand but your ass is still going to get burned by global warming. : )

[-] 0 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

the only thing that can change the climate permantly is the SUN. human activity has no bearing on the climate,............it's a scam to instill you with fear , control you and separate you from your money.

[-] 3 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

you are sadly misinformed. a comet or meteor strike could change the earth's climate long enough to wipe a large percentage of species living on the earth. please tell me how global warming is instilling me with fear, controlling me and separating me from my money? you seem to be describing the current financial/political structure in the united states.

[-] 0 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

the earth has been repeatedly been struck by meteors,.......some of the quite large. you're afraid that you're going to "kill" the planet by your human avtivity. controlling you buy bad mouthing internal combustion engines, raising the price of gas ( picking your pocket) when the usa has more oil, gas and coal than the rest of the world,..which means nothing if you don't go after it,........the epa and greenies wont' allow it.

[-] 2 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

please provide a link to your claim about america's oil, gas and coal reserves. i really want to see this!!!!! lol!!!

[-] 0 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

www.marketwatch.com/WVFossils/Energy.html

[-] 1 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

a dead link just like your assertions. please don't bore me with games like this.

[-] 0 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

you can go to martketwatch and do your own search,.............or are you too lazy?

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

wow you are a rabid dog,. .

[-] -3 points by DKAtoday (26862) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Permanently? Global warming and cooling have natural cycles. Right now? We are in a warming cycle. Man is adding to the warming. It is only permanent until the next cooling cycle. That is if we continue as we are and live that long.

[-] 0 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

how can it be "permanent ' if you know that this is natural cycle of the earth and will change back to cooling?,..........on it's own, no human restrictions required. people are not adding a thing.

[+] -5 points by DKAtoday (26862) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You always ask and answer your own questions?


[-] 0 points by po6059 (51) 20 minutes ago

the only thing that can change the climate permantly is the SUN. human activity has no bearing on the climate,............it's a scam to instill you with fear , control you and separate you from your money. ↥like ↧dislike reply permalink

[-] 1 points by po6059 (51) 0 minutes ago

how can it be "permanent ' if you know that this is natural cylce of the earth and will change back to cooling?,..........on it's own, no human restrictions required. people are not adding a thing. ↥like ↧dislike reply permalink


OH and BTW

Burning fossil fuel is adding. That would tend to prolong a warming cycle as well as make it worse.

I never said that it would make it permanent just be nasty till the end of the cycle.

You were the one who got all intelligent and started talking about the Sun.

[-] -2 points by leonardsova (-24) 2 years ago

Sorry there is no Global warming. Nice try though Al

[-] 0 points by po6059 (72) 2 years ago

very well put.

[-] -2 points by F350 (-259) 2 years ago

Thanks,I appreciate it.