| Pages:
1
..
6
7
8
9
10
..
18 |
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 17341
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by David K  | | Buddah, tides are different, beaches are different, the sea LEVEL average is not. Ususlly we use the average high tide line. That palm, my beach
house, Shell Island, Alfonsina's Resort are ALL the same height above that average sea level today as they were 50 years ago. You can see it in
photos. |
Dk,
Your reading palm leaves is no more truthy than reading tea leaves!
|
|
|
Ricardo
Nomad
Posts: 139
Registered: 12-9-2004
Location: Telkwa
Member Is Offline
|
|
We’ve seen that methane, which accounts for only 14 percent of emissions worldwide, traps up to 100 times more heat than carbon dioxide over a 5-year
period. This means that even though carbon dioxide molecules outnumber methane 5 to 1, this comparatively smaller amount of methane is still 19 times
greater a problem for climate change over a 5 year period, and 4 times greater over a 100 year period.
To put it another way, any methane molecule released today is 100 times more heat-trapping than a molecule of carbon dioxide, or potentially even
higher according to NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
With the UN establishing various tipping points for irreversible climate change damage on the horizon, it’s time that methane enters mainstream
consideration. And better yet, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that livestock production is responsible for 14.5
percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, while other organizations like the Worldwatch Institute have estimated it could be as much as 51 percent –
it’s time that we look beyond our gas tanks and on to our plates.
And They keep pooping and farting
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64493
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666 | | Quote: Originally posted by David K | | Buddah, tides are different, beaches are different, the sea LEVEL average is not. Ususlly we use the average high tide line. That palm, my beach
house, Shell Island, Alfonsina's Resort are ALL the same height above that average sea level today as they were 50 years ago. You can see it in
photos. |
Dk,
Your reading palm leaves is no more truthy than reading tea leaves!
|
Yes, and yet the answer is so simple you can't accept it to be true, even when the truth is in your face.
I am not making any wild claims, nothing political with truth and facts, just saying LOOK people... SEE these things that have not moved in 50 years
compared to the hide tide line... and the high tide line is STILL not touching these things next to the ocean/ sea/ gulf: Palm Trees, Alfonsina's
Restaurant, the old road along Concepcion Bay, the street I grew up on, etc., etc., etc.
|
|
|
LancairDriver
Super Nomad
Posts: 1587
Registered: 2-22-2008
Location: On the Road
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by bajabuddha | | Quote: Originally posted by bajacamper | Snarky nastiness is passed off as scientific fact here by some. It really does little to advance your computer model global warming stories.
I do not understand why you think you must insult DK at every opportunity. I have never seen him do anything on this forum other than try and help
people any way he can. I wouldn't blame him if he just packed it in. Those of you he has helped might want to speak up as they come crashing down
on me |
*************
*************
|
I have yet to see DK stoop as low as personal or snarky insults to anyone on any subject. He is usually the first to welcome new Nomads and provide
all the help and information he can. He is way up on the high road compared to this bottom feeder who needs to find a board that better accommodates
his sick, sick (get a room)mind.
[Edited on 9-7-2015 by BajaNomad]
|
|
|
Pescador
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3587
Registered: 10-17-2002
Location: Baja California Sur
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by DianaT | | Quote: Originally posted by Pescador | | Quote: Originally posted by DianaT | | Quote: Originally posted by Pescador | I thought I knew something about the arguments on both sides of the issue but I found the most informative book on the issue to be:
Climate Change: The Facts Paperback – April 21, 2015
by J.Abbot (Author), J.S. Armstrong (Author), A.Bolt (Author), R.Carter (Author), & 20 more
279 customer reviews
See all 2 formats and editions
Kindle
$9.95
Read with Our Free App
Paperback
$15.89
2 Used from $49.79
3 New from $15.89
|
Quote from Amazon, "The authors of Climate Change: The Facts number some of the most prominent dissenters from Big Climate alarmism...."
|
That was my point Diane, This issue is so divisive and depending on your perspective you are either a "believer" or a "denier". A parallel issue
exhibits itself when you have "Christians" and "Muslims" arguing over who is right. Depending on how you see the world, you can only see one
perspective and find it impossible to understand where the other side comes from. When I was a youngster, Science was a perspective and all sides
were open for discussion and proof. No one assumed that they understood all of the little nuances of thought and open discussion was welcomed in the
hope of discovering the truth. This has not happened with the scientific thought behind Global Warming. If we had accepted all of the ideas put
forth by Al Gore in his propaganda movie, we would be awash in high water, the Polar Bears would all be dead, and people would be dying by the
thousands. Instead, we are finding that things are pretty much the same as always, the earth has built in adjustment and compensating mechanisms, and
the only constant that we see is that this issue has become a political religion with "believers" and "deniers" but we have somehow thrown true
science out the window and we spend all of our time justifying our beliefs about how the world functions and damn those who see it any differently.
So I read a book that has some very fine arguments about the foolishness going on with trying to get everyone to believe in some silly computer models
that have shown we are on the "eve of destruction". When that destruction did not come to pass, as predicted by Al Gore and the likes, we change the
discussion slightly but the basic belief remains the same. If somehow, we could get back to true "science" instead of pre-disposed ideology, then we
might truly begin to understand what is going on. So, I challenge you to read the book and then we can have an informed discussion instead of a
useless replay of political positions. Of course, I could get upset and chop off your head like the Christians and Muslims, but on the same vein, you
could do the same to me. So when we get through chopping off our heads, I suspect that the world goes on doing its own thing, which it has been doing
for millions of years anyway. |
You found a book that backed up your opinion. I won't dismiss reading it, but I have been researching the book, and well...... and I guess I just
can't buy your analogy --- two very different subjects. It just doesn't work. I have read the other side in the form of essays, etc., I just have
more faith in the scientists.
Meantime, our recent trip to the the far north in Canada educated us that there are no deniers up there. They are living with the changes that have
happened in the last few decades and sincerely concerned about the future as climate change is being accelerated by human activity. And that is not a
political opinion, it is based upon the many studies down by the scientists that you don't trust.
Ni modo --- I can't wait to hear from some about the fact that Obama is in Alaska right now to personally witness many of the changes.
Oh, the question that is never answered is the conspiracy theory that somehow all of this is to gain money and control --- that has never been
explained. :-)
Besides, if we made the changes to start taking better care of our earth and we later find out that it really is not a crisis, all we end up with is a
better world to leave to our grandchildren.
As a side note, before anyone buys the outrage of some of the right wing about Obama "renaming" Mt. McKinley to Denali, please know that in Alaska it
is known as Denali and do watch this video by the Conservative Senator from Alaska. Of course, some of the biggest noise is from Ohio politicians,
McKinley's home state. :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAn3aT8yfHc
On edit, I tried to embed it and still don't know how to do that.
[Edited on 9-1-2015 by DianaT] |
Thank you so much, you make my point exactly. No matter how much information we receive, if it gets filtered through our belief system, not much
changes. What you call scientists, I call the perpetrators of Climategate, where it was proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they had fudged on the
numbers and predictions. And each side will gather any little bit of information to justify further belief in what they perceive as the "right" way
of viewing the world.
|
|
|
DianaT
Select Nomad
Posts: 10020
Registered: 12-17-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Pescador | | Quote: Originally posted by DianaT | | Quote: Originally posted by Pescador | | Quote: Originally posted by DianaT | | Quote: Originally posted by Pescador | I thought I knew something about the arguments on both sides of the issue but I found the most informative book on the issue to be:
Climate Change: The Facts Paperback – April 21, 2015
by J.Abbot (Author), J.S. Armstrong (Author), A.Bolt (Author), R.Carter (Author), & 20 more
279 customer reviews
See all 2 formats and editions
Kindle
$9.95
Read with Our Free App
Paperback
$15.89
2 Used from $49.79
3 New from $15.89
|
Quote from Amazon, "The authors of Climate Change: The Facts number some of the most prominent dissenters from Big Climate alarmism...."
|
That was my point Diane, This issue is so divisive and depending on your perspective you are either a "believer" or a "denier". A parallel issue
exhibits itself when you have "Christians" and "Muslims" arguing over who is right. Depending on how you see the world, you can only see one
perspective and find it impossible to understand where the other side comes from. When I was a youngster, Science was a perspective and all sides
were open for discussion and proof. No one assumed that they understood all of the little nuances of thought and open discussion was welcomed in the
hope of discovering the truth. This has not happened with the scientific thought behind Global Warming. If we had accepted all of the ideas put
forth by Al Gore in his propaganda movie, we would be awash in high water, the Polar Bears would all be dead, and people would be dying by the
thousands. Instead, we are finding that things are pretty much the same as always, the earth has built in adjustment and compensating mechanisms, and
the only constant that we see is that this issue has become a political religion with "believers" and "deniers" but we have somehow thrown true
science out the window and we spend all of our time justifying our beliefs about how the world functions and damn those who see it any differently.
So I read a book that has some very fine arguments about the foolishness going on with trying to get everyone to believe in some silly computer models
that have shown we are on the "eve of destruction". When that destruction did not come to pass, as predicted by Al Gore and the likes, we change the
discussion slightly but the basic belief remains the same. If somehow, we could get back to true "science" instead of pre-disposed ideology, then we
might truly begin to understand what is going on. So, I challenge you to read the book and then we can have an informed discussion instead of a
useless replay of political positions. Of course, I could get upset and chop off your head like the Christians and Muslims, but on the same vein, you
could do the same to me. So when we get through chopping off our heads, I suspect that the world goes on doing its own thing, which it has been doing
for millions of years anyway. |
You found a book that backed up your opinion. I won't dismiss reading it, but I have been researching the book, and well...... and I guess I just
can't buy your analogy --- two very different subjects. It just doesn't work. I have read the other side in the form of essays, etc., I just have
more faith in the scientists.
Meantime, our recent trip to the the far north in Canada educated us that there are no deniers up there. They are living with the changes that have
happened in the last few decades and sincerely concerned about the future as climate change is being accelerated by human activity. And that is not a
political opinion, it is based upon the many studies down by the scientists that you don't trust.
Ni modo --- I can't wait to hear from some about the fact that Obama is in Alaska right now to personally witness many of the changes.
Oh, the question that is never answered is the conspiracy theory that somehow all of this is to gain money and control --- that has never been
explained. :-)
Besides, if we made the changes to start taking better care of our earth and we later find out that it really is not a crisis, all we end up with is a
better world to leave to our grandchildren.
As a side note, before anyone buys the outrage of some of the right wing about Obama "renaming" Mt. McKinley to Denali, please know that in Alaska it
is known as Denali and do watch this video by the Conservative Senator from Alaska. Of course, some of the biggest noise is from Ohio politicians,
McKinley's home state. :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAn3aT8yfHc
On edit, I tried to embed it and still don't know how to do that.
[Edited on 9-1-2015 by DianaT] |
Thank you so much, you make my point exactly. No matter how much information we receive, if it gets filtered through our belief system, not much
changes. What you call scientists, I call the perpetrators of Climategate, where it was proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they had fudged on the
numbers and predictions. And each side will gather any little bit of information to justify further belief in what they perceive as the "right" way
of viewing the world. |
You really believe it made your point??? Ni modo --- your logic and analogy, IMHO was very faulty and I still think so. Proven beyond a shadow of
doubt? Really, I have not seen that. But, as always, you are welcome to see things as you do --- but if you think I proved your point, well that is
a REAL stretch. Good evening and back to processing pictures from where they are living the reality.
BTW--- thank you for your VERY generous help for my special friend, Penny. She gives it all to her grandpas and it is difficult for her to accept
help for herself although it is needed. I think we can agree that she is among the special people in the world.
[Edited on 9-1-2015 by DianaT]
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
Was the factual confirmation of contamination by DDT "globally" arrived at through a "belief system" other than scientific investigation ...
There are other examples of scientific identification of human actions which have had varying degrees of impact of our environment and/or planet
That some scientist do not agree on some issues is to be expected and tolerated
Many scientific theory's have been difficult to accept ... even with proof as they typically require a change in thinking and/or actions which the
human species wouldn't appear to accept readily in most cases
The old "comfort zone" in action ... 
btw there is still a tolerance of .05 ppm on most food products grown .. as DDT and/or its metabolites will be with us for some time to come .... even
through its registration and/or use was banned some time ago (72) for crops ... and its registration as a Termaticide in the late 80's
The "belief system" used was based on Human Risk ... which is based in science with human input as to what is acceptable Human Health risk .. which is
one in a million ... as it relates to cancer
|
|
|
bajabuddha
Banned
Posts: 4024
Registered: 4-12-2013
Location: Baja New Mexico
Member Is Offline
Mood: Always cranky unless medicated
|
|
The thing that tweaks my trigger finger more than anything else are the naysayers who disrespect the body of Science and scientists as a whole,
claiming total 'numbers and prediction fudging' and conspiracy theories just to boost their own agendas.
Yet, these fudgers collectively put men on the surface of the moon, several times.
We have a couple small go-carts putting around on Mars and posting pics back to us to transfer to Photobucket to post here, on the Internet, another
'scientific' achievement.
They just sent a solar/atomic powered 'science-gathering' vehicle sending pictures back 8 BILLION miles from here, flying by a target half the size of
our own moon, and less than 5,000 miles away... That's like hitting a hole-in-one with a golf ball from New York to L.A. (if not Bankok).
And recently, they placed a man-made 'science machine' on a speeding Comet (and another still in orbit around it) to gather information vital to the
basic nature of life...
Yet data cumulatively gathered by this body of same is discounted and disrespected by insurance salesmen and landscapers, barbers and truckdrivers;
your 'every-day Joe's (and Joannes)'. There are a few in the Academic Community also anti, but I believe the numbers posted of the AC deeply
committed to our involvement of planetary harm is around 95%???
So, go ahead and speak your minds and beliefs. We're all entitled to them; "Opinions are like rectums... everybody has one".... but when it comes to
'fixing' something that's broke, talk to a professional. That goes for your car, boat, house, and the very real current and potential global
anomalies WE have collectively wrought just in the last 100 years. I personally don't believe it's reversible. There will be much adapting to be
done.
Mankind is growing far more speedily than the ability to keep up with the damage being done... too bad none of us now will be here to see the effects
100 years from now and just how altered the world will be. The data (from those phony old lab-coats) is showing the changes growing exponentially.
The heavy-hitters trying to allay the damage are just trying to slow that exponential curve while better alternatives can be reached.
To try to justify ''There IS NO damage" is, IMHO, totally irresponsible.
[Edited on 9-1-2015 by bajabuddha]
I don't have a BUCKET LIST, but I do have a F***- IT LIST a mile long!
86 - 45*
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
What he said ^^ .. spot on
|
|
|
gnukid
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4410
Registered: 7-2-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Buddha
Accepting "science news" as fact without questioning the source, the data, the thesis and conclusion is an absurd notion that is ultimately a form of
US Americanism.
If you critically review the list of sources provided in this thread earlier
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
You wil see that the sources are predominantly using a form a psychological manipulation. Many of the papers have been demonstrated to be grossly
misleading.
Obama and Holder have publicly stated they would use programming to psychologically manipulate the people, use crisis to their advantage to bring on
new policies many of which reduce our freedom and increase control. Karl Rove famously said that they create the history by manipulations of
story-telling and that the people are only here to watch.
Basically what they are saying, as authors like George Orwell have shown, is that they believe that history, science, facts, are malleable and can
change on whim and that the people simply accept these without question, just as you are suggesting.
It makes far more scientific sense for each person to question science and validate thesis and conclusions with personal experience and confirmed
facts devoid of religion of belief.
You must understand that much of "accepted science" is later demonstrated to not be valid. Are you certain about what is electricity? Where oil comes
from? What is time? What is space made of? Is the human body and the universe electric and connected? What is at the core of the earth? What is on the
other side of the moon? What is the moon?
So much is unknown for certain and requires thoughtful consideration.
[Edited on 9-1-2015 by gnukid]
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
Thinking is what science is all about .. and "questions" is at the core of all science ... which I've always enjoyed
When one stops asking questions ... they are dead IMHO
And at this time in my life ... I tend to go with Quantum Foam as it relates to our Universe and/or "Reality"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_foam
|
|
|
bajabuddha
Banned
Posts: 4024
Registered: 4-12-2013
Location: Baja New Mexico
Member Is Offline
Mood: Always cranky unless medicated
|
|
Gnukid, I agree... but do you doggedly follow your auto mechanic around the car when he changes your oil? Do you read every word in the 'rules and
conditions' to every paper or website you have to sign?
You said "You must understand that much of "accepted science" is later demonstrated to not be valid. Are you certain about what is electricity? Where
oil comes from? What is time? What is space made of? Is the human body and the universe electric and connected? What is at the core of the earth? What
is on the other side of the moon? What is the moon?
So much is unknown for certain and requires thoughtful consideration."
Answer, who found out all those things to begin with? Skeptical Skientists Skimming the Skurface of Skintelligence. Where the hell do people think
science (and the art of...) came from, anyway?? Curiosity, that's where, only over time the 'Rules of Science" became more rigid and universally
conformed to.
I'll still go with the pro's.... I never trust anyone 'totally', and nobody should. But I'm not going to let a store clerk do my dentistry, either.
I don't have a BUCKET LIST, but I do have a F***- IT LIST a mile long!
86 - 45*
|
|
|
bajacamper
Nomad
Posts: 113
Registered: 2-21-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
100 years from now, let's see. We have currently predictions out 100 years on just about any subject you want. Climate, population, space travel, it
goes on and on making for a long list. Since anyone can make a prediction out 100 years, I'll make one. The people in the 22nd century will look
back and wonder what those idiots were thinking. The world was in dire geo-political straights and the foremost concern of the supposed leader of the
free world was carbon credits and Co2. Adults were finally put in charge and put an end to the nonsense. Like all predictions, I leave myself plenty
of wiggle room. Might be right, might be wrong.
|
|
|
Mexitron
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3397
Registered: 9-21-2003
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Member Is Offline
Mood: Happy!
|
|
Ever read about Amit Goswami Phd.("The Quantum Activist")? He plays in the quantum foam.
http://www.amitgoswami.org/about/
|
|
|
StuckSucks
Super Nomad
Posts: 2307
Registered: 10-17-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
"Climate experts believe the next ice age is on its way." - Leonard Nimoy, 1978
Video: The Coming Ice Age - 1978
|
|
|
StuckSucks
Super Nomad
Posts: 2307
Registered: 10-17-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
1970s Global Cooling Alarmism
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64493
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
Perfect StuckSucks... and because that didn't scare enough people to blindly follow government dictates and pay more taxes, they switched the crisis
180º from cooling to warming! Now the elites are empowered and rich, as the masses are dumbed down and poorer.
|
|
|
chuckie
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6082
Registered: 2-20-2012
Location: Kansas Prairies
Member Is Offline
Mood: Weary
|
|
Speak for yourself....
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64493
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
Who do you think I am speaking for, if not for myself?
Do you not see the same thing I do? In 1978, the media were all onboard the global cooling drama. 20 years later, they flipped, and without an ounce
of evidence to prove anything has changed, proclaimed the world was warming dangerously. When there was no warming happening for several years in a
row, and the scientists admitted to altering the figures, they renamed it 'Climate Change'. As if we all didn't know climates always change, man or no
man.
|
|
|
chuckie
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6082
Registered: 2-20-2012
Location: Kansas Prairies
Member Is Offline
Mood: Weary
|
|
I have never figured out, who are the "masses". I am not dumber, way smarter over time, and I am certainly not poorer.....Maybe I am one of the
"elites" ....Who are the "masses" that you have decided are dumb and poor?
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
6
7
8
9
10
..
18 |
|
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
