| Pages:
1
..
4
5
6
7
8
..
11 |
k-rico
Super Nomad
Posts: 2079
Registered: 7-10-2008
Location: Playas de Tijuana
Member Is Offline
|
|
Very Interesting........
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Special:SeaLevel
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 20354
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
krico,
all data is supect unlesss approved by our local expert climatologist, davidk. You know him, he and Taco de Baja run the Shell Island Research Center
(RISC) for UNAM and UABC.
|
|
|
Taco de Baja
Super Nomad
Posts: 1913
Registered: 4-14-2004
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain, CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Dreamin' of Baja
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by mtgoat666
krico,
all data is supect unlesss approved by our local expert climatologist, davidk. You know him, he and Taco de Baja run the Shell Island Research Center
(RISC) for UNAM and UABC. |
Lets not forget "scientists" like yourself and Crusoe tossing out facts like: "....the majority of greenhouse gasses come out of tailpipes....."
The majority of greenhouse gasses are NATURAL (even AGW scientists and the IPCC accept this). Of the gasses that come from people, as the graph k-rico
provided shows, only 14% come from tailpipes....Maybe that's a majority in your LA LA land, but not in the real world.
As for shell island, I've never been there, not on their payroll, and am not involved with any research that occurs there....
Truth generally lies in the coordination of antagonistic opinions
-Herbert Spencer
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
Something about this whole Global Warming thing just doesn't pass the smell test.
|
|
|
k-rico
Super Nomad
Posts: 2079
Registered: 7-10-2008
Location: Playas de Tijuana
Member Is Offline
|
|
Taco said:
"The majority of greenhouse gasses are NATURAL (even AGW scientists and the IPCC accept this)."
I don't see the significance of that statement.
The phrase "tipping point" comes to mind.
Or perhaps, "the straw that broke the camel's back" is more to the point.
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 20354
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by k-rico
Taco said:
"The majority of greenhouse gasses are NATURAL (even AGW scientists and the IPCC accept this)."
I don't see the significance of that statement.
The phrase "tipping point" comes to mind.
Or perhaps, "the straw that broke the camel's back" is more to the point. |
using Taco's logic, the majority of death is natural, so a little extra death at hand of drunk driver is OK in the big picture, all is still in state
of semi-balance. or another Taco-argument could be: humans are subjected to lots of natural radiation, so no harm in environmental exposure to
anthropogenic nuke waste from a little leak now and then, it's just a little more.
.
|
|
|
gnukid
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4411
Registered: 7-2-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by k-rico
Taco said:
"The majority of greenhouse gasses are NATURAL (even AGW scientists and the IPCC accept this)."
I don't see the significance of that statement.
The phrase "tipping point" comes to mind.
Or perhaps, "the straw that broke the camel's back" is more to the point. |
The point was made in response to Crusoe's comments that people driving cars generated the most damaging CO2 while it has been documented that Cows are the leading source of CO2 pollution and that a volcano would well exceed the human generated influence.
Humans, like cows exist and breathe and eat. Attempting to tax human behavior or suggest that it's inherently evil is a malthusian concept, that human populations are growing more significantly that the earth's ability to feed and manage the population which is
purely conjecture.
The earth is actually quite bare of people; if climate change is following a warming cycle on the earth now than the northern regions would
increasingly open up as fertile land for farming production as temperatures rise.
To suggest that populations are inherently bad, or that one person has more justification than another to exist is not justified by any means but is
at the heart of this subject.
Unfortunately, the subject of declaring human output as bad, brings to mind the suggestion of justifying euthanasia, genocide, forced abortions and
sterilizations-which are all subjects presented in parallel with these malthusian concepts. In fact the Science czar John Holdren co-authored a published book promoting some these very concepts.
The truth is quite simple, people exist on earth. People have the inherent right to exist. Carbon is not bad-it's good, people are not bad and people
have equal rights to liberty and freedom to pursue their lives without the added taxation or intrusion of Gore's tax on your existence.
If you want to do something positive to reduce your output do it. Talk about it and spread the word but do not try to justify malthusian concepts to
promote the convoluted legislation currently proposed as Climate Change legislation which is simply a method to create Carbon Units as a new currency
or a obligatory debt and require an intrusive smart grid that will give Gore and his cronies the right to tax and fine every action you make while
also incrementally invade your life in every way shape and form, further justifying evil.
This is truly the hoax of the century and must be opposed.
[Edited on 8-26-2009 by gnukid]
|
|
|
toneart
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4901
Registered: 7-23-2006
Member Is Offline
Mood: Skeptical
|
|
I am NOT qualified to offer a scientific opinion! So like most of us, I am compelled to read and try to inform myself, and maybe run down to the beach
with my Pacifico and a tapemeasure. My opinion is not important, but I am pretty sure this is not true:
"I conclude the giving government powers to restrict our normal activities ONLY serves to take power away from the people by the (neo-Marxist)
administration, now in control." 
|
|
|
k-rico
Super Nomad
Posts: 2079
Registered: 7-10-2008
Location: Playas de Tijuana
Member Is Offline
|
|
Gnukid,
I was just going to post that naysayers have their place but your post makes me think,
"What's the use?"
[Edited on 8-24-2009 by k-rico]
|
|
|
gnukid
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4411
Registered: 7-2-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by k-rico
"What's the use?"
"that a volcano would well exceed the human generated influence." - not true, not even close. |
K-rico, obviously there are arguments in many directions.
These are not my controversial ideas, I simply read the encyclopedia and am quoting from the works of the past and current administration. I am
pointing out the published issues, which are controversial.
Not my ideas nor is this discussion a left-right paradigm, as some would suggest pandering to inflamatory speak. It is about talking about issues,
discussing loving humankind, respecting your neighbors equality and their right to exist. So let's relax a little, see our common goals and offer some
consideration for each other.
I link to the published works and policies of the current administration in order to point out, these are the polices of the US administration and
have been for some time.
The connection between climate change proponents, malthusianism, genocide, euthanasia, forced abortions, sterilizations is quite clear and well stated by its proponents. These concepts are the policies of the current administration and published in their work, for example, in his book Ecoscience: John Holdren wrote "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated," to save the planet. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader said she was under the impression that legalizing abortion with the 1973 Roe. v. Wade case would
eliminate undesirable members of the populace, or as she put it "populations that we don't want to have too many of."
Furthermore, John D. Rockefeller has stated the he supports Holdren, who "walks on water and advocates geoenginerring the climate with chemtrails, which is apparently underway.
Let's remind ourselves the US administration has been and is actively pursuing a policy of genocide in Iraq, Afghansitan, and previously supported
these polices in Serbia, Vietnam, Korea, Japan etc... etc... and it is well documented that the US funded the N-zification and Genocidal polices in
Germany and when the war was over, they brought many if not most of the Genocidal scientist to the USA to head up their Bioweapons at Fort Detrick.
The level of poisoning of the earth through the emissions of depleted uranium for the purpose of war is massive and yet there is exists no
justification for the incessant bombing and military genocidal operations in the MiddleEast. Yet, few would even mention that in this discussion about
human affects on pollution?
Why, how could we be discussing the relevance of human generated CO2 versus the US military industrial complex vast poisoning of the earth with
depleted uranium? Where is the logic? Can you honestly discuss the significance of human CO2 in comparison to the vast waste of the Military today or
ever?
Now, I understand it is quite unpleasant to consider these issues seriously and it's practically unheard of to discuss the role of the global bankers
such in the Global Warming meme, the role the US played in WWII or in worldwide genocidal policies, however, if we must discuss these individual
points we must look at their inter-relationship and see the documentation as it exists in volumes today drawing upon the points, and the
inter-relationship between profitability for drug companies, medical care, war, carbon units, cap and trade, GMO, and the polices which result in vast
suffering for the sole purpose of profit. Yes it is purely evil. Love can overcome these policies when we see each other as equals with inalienable
rights to exist.
Please do reply with links to resources and let's focus on optimism toward local policies and approaches that improve the well being of everybody
equally. Let's end the war atrocities, genocidal global polices and lets end torture, military contractors, mercinaries, depleted uranium bombs, GMO,
etc... which are simply policies of death for profit.
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 20354
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by gnukid
| Quote: | Originally posted by k-rico
"What's the use?"
"that a volcano would well exceed the human generated influence." - not true, not even close. |
K-rico, obviously there are arguments in many directions.
These are not my controversial ideas, I simply read the encyclopedia and am quoting from the works of the past and current administration. I am
pointing out the published issues, which are controversial.
Not my ideas nor is this discussion a left-right paradigm, as some would suggest pandering to inflamatory speak. It is about talking about issues,
discussing loving humankind, respecting your neighbors equality and their right to exist. So let's relax a little, see our common goals and offer some
consideration for each other.
I link to the published works and policies of the current administration in order to point out, these are the polices of the US administration and
have been for some time.
The connection between climate change proponents, malthusianism, genocide, euthanasia, forced abortions, sterilizations is quite clear and well stated by its proponents. These concepts are the policies of the current administration and published in their work, for example, in his book Ecoscience: John Holdren wrote "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated," to save the planet. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader said she was under the impression that legalizing abortion with the 1973 Roe. v. Wade case would
eliminate undesirable members of the populace, or as she put it "populations that we don't want to have too many of."
Furthermore, John D. Rockefeller has stated the he supports Holdren, who "walks on water and advocates geoenginerring the climate with chemtrails, which is apparently underway.
Let's remind ourselves the US administration has been and is actively pursuing a policy of genocide in Iraq, Afghansitan, and previously supported
these polices in Serbia, Vietnam, Korea, Japan etc... etc... and it is well documented that the US funded the N-zification and Genocidal polices in
Germany and when the war was over, they brought many if not most of the Genocidal scientist to the USA to head up their Bioweapons at Fort Detrick.
The level of poisoning of the earth through the emissions of depleted uranium for the purpose of war is massive and yet there is exists no
justification for the incessant bombing and military genocidal operations in the MiddleEast. Yet, few would even mention that in this discussion about
human affects on pollution?
Why, how could we be discussing the relevance of human generated CO2 versus the US military industrial complex vast poisoning of the earth with
depleted uranium? Where is the logic? Can you honestly discuss the significance of human CO2 in comparison to the vast waste of the Military today or
ever?
Now, I understand it is quite unpleasant to consider these issues seriously and it's practically unheard of to discuss the role of the global bankers
such in the Global Warming meme, the role the US played in WWII or in worldwide genocidal policies, however, if we must discuss these individual
points we must look at their inter-relationship and see the documentation as it exists in volumes today drawing upon the points, and the
inter-relationship between profitability for drug companies, medical care, war, carbon units, cap and trade, GMO, and the polices which result in vast
suffering for the sole purpose of profit. Yes it is purely evil. Love can overcome these policies when we see each other as equals with inalienable
rights to exist.
Please do reply with links to resources and let's focus on optimism toward local policies and approaches that improve the well being of everybody
equally. Let's end the war atrocities, genocidal global polices and lets end torture, military contractors, mercinaries, depleted uranium bombs, GMO,
etc... which are simply policies of death for profit. |
newkid,
you are totally friggin' nuts, but funny none the less.
|
|
|
oxxo
Banned
Posts: 2347
Registered: 5-17-2006
Location: Wherever I am, I'm there
Member Is Offline
Mood: If I was feeling any better, I'd be twins!
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by gnukid
I link to the published works and policies of the current administration in order to point out, these are the polices of the US administration and
have been for some time.
The connection between climate change proponents, malthusianism, , euthanasia, forced abortions, sterilizations is quite clear and well stated by its
These concepts are the policies of the current administration |
 Sarah Palin is that you? I bet you can see Washington DC from your front porch in Centenario!
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
Could Albert Gore possibly be wrong?
|
|
|
gnukid
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4411
Registered: 7-2-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by mtgoat666
newkid,
you are totally friggin' nuts, but funny none the less. |
What is nuts is refusing to read the published works of the current and past administrations and US history instead referring to ad hominem attacks on
your neighbor.
Though I understand why you might believe that its a waste of time connecting the dots which demonstrate that profit is the primary motivation of US
and World Geopolitics. Who cares?
I understand so many to refuse to read up on US history, or read about Gore's Climate Change proposals and their inception, their purpose and intent,
its far easier to attack a peaceful gentile person than to consider the interconnectedness and absurdity of global banking profits and Climate Change
legislation and its empirical implications.
It's true that one might go nuts if one were to read and consider the works of Holdren or read the Cap and Trade legislation or the heath care
legislation or consider the War policies-which are insane.
It is overwhelming however to refuse to do so and attack your neighbor who is of no threat to you while these polices clearly are, is nuts. The
administration is clearly betting that more people will refuse to read and will prefer to fake fight with a false paradigm whether it be left vs
right, christian vs muslim, socialism vs capitalism etc... these are finely tuned adult parent child emotional pressure trigger points which distract
the majority from considering the truth or reading beyond headline news.
I am of no threat to you nor would it cause you harm to educate yourself while remaining critical. However to refuse to become informed beyond main
stream media is a threat to your well being.
Please consider making your point with sources.
Here are a few sources about Climate Change legislation:
Agenda for a New Economy: From Phantom Wealth to Real Wealth
Who Pays for Cap and Trade?
Cap and trade is a license to cheat and steal
Cap-n-Trade: WaPo's Mallaby Doesn't get it
Industry caught in carbon ‘smokescreen’
Obama’s hidden bailout of General Electric ( Cap and trade taxes )
House Democrats Introduce Cap-and-Trade, ‘Clean Energy’ Bill
Buzzwords: Rephrasing Obama's lexicon
Cooking up carbon credits
BARTON: Sending us back to 1875: Reducing our carbon footprint
Jeffery Sachs says forget Carbon Caps
|
|
|
tripledigitken
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4848
Registered: 9-27-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Is Al Gore a member of the Illuminati? Are the Illuminati getting rich off the Carbon Credits just like Big Al?
Ken
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
Say does anyone have any thoughts on climate change?? Great discussion on an important topic, thanks, great source of information and entertainment at
the same time.. who needs Netflix's
|
|
|
Crusoe
Senior Nomad
Posts: 731
Registered: 10-14-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
The circle graph is not accurate and very misleading depending on just how a person interpretets it!! .....By Sector..... The Fossil Fuel Retreival
Processing and Distribution at 11.3% and The Residential Commercial and other Sources 10.3% should be lumped into and with Transportation Fuels at 14%
giving the total for that of 35.6% which is way more accurate, and more in keeping with alot of the estimates I have heard that are bieng thrown
around now. There are alot of experts out there!!! ++C++
|
|
|
gnukid
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4411
Registered: 7-2-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by tripledigitken
Is Al Gore a member of the Illuminati? Are the Illuminati getting rich off the Carbon Credits just like Big Al?
Ken |
This is clearly a point of distraction. However the answer is yes if you meant global bankers, because, the legislation offers the opportunity to earn
Carbon Credits simply by owning large parcels of undeveloped land, to "offset deforestation" p. 348 line 11 of the previously proposed legislation,
to reduce corporate factory output, such as buying an energy plant and reducing energy creation, while individuals would be constantly racking up
carbon units as debt for their every action with no ability to trade out these credits.
The Clean Energy Cap and Trade legislation unfairly puts the burden on poor people who would suffer greatly from incremental energy cost increases while providing loopholes for the most wealthy, which allow for no energy to saved and instead greenhouse gasses to increase while also putting the gathered funds in the hands of these same wealthy to invest in
new businesses such as manufacturing and managing the smart grid invasive monitoring system. Fines and debts on individuals would be accruing daily,
per incident, and the doubling fines are not open to appeal-resulting in increasing fines. Even off the grid homes would be subject to inspection and
base line energy use above average use which would generate taxes and fines etc...
What matters is each person and individual efforts, not focusing on who is to blame-these profiteers are largely pawns who are compromised with no way
out-the future is up to the masses not the compromised elites like Gore, Clinton, Blair, Obama, Bush, etc... If enough people educate themselves and
become involved in local community organization, the vast efforts of global banking cabal become less and less relevant. Simply by educating yourself
the global banking cabal becomes less of a threat to your well being, by giving you the common sense to respect your neighbor and work together for
local common sense improvements.
The American Clean Energy Act provides no requirement for actual reduction in greenhouse gasses while the cost of energy to each individual will rise
proving profits to the most wealthy, providing a massive transfer of wealth to a small group of investors upon a new convoluted financial market called Carbon Credits Trading.
All of the well known market manipulation tricks of the S&L debacle are well outlined for example, from the proposed legislation about Carbon Markets:
"‘‘(3) REGULATED ALLOWANCE DERIVATIVE.—The term ‘regulated allowance derivative’ means an instrument that is or includes an instrument-‘‘(A)
which—‘‘(i) is of the character of, or is commonly known to the trade as, a ‘put option’, ‘call option’, ‘privilege’, ‘indemnity’, ‘advance guaranty’,
‘decline guaranty’, or ‘swap agreement’; or ‘‘(ii) is a contract of sale for future delivery; and ‘‘(B) the value of which, in whole or in part, is
expressly linked to the price of a regulated allowance or another regulated allowance derivative."
Green revenues are touted as a line item in Obama's federal budget claiming $646 billion savings over eight years. The question looms, "How can Obama generate “climate revenues”? By forcing companies to pay for the right to emit greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide."
[Edited on 8-24-2009 by gnukid]
|
|
|
Taco de Baja
Super Nomad
Posts: 1913
Registered: 4-14-2004
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain, CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Dreamin' of Baja
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Crusoe
The circle graph is not accurate and very misleading depending on just how a person interpretets it!! |
Agreed!
Like the fact the graph ignores natural input of CO2, Methane, and Nitrous Oxides?
Like the fact it ignores water vapor? And shows CO2 as comprising 72% of the total….Neat trick when CO2 is actually on the order of 0.038% of the
atmosphere, or maybe 3.6% of all greenhouse gasses…Depending on where (over the land or over the sea) and what altitude you take your readings.
Sure CO2 is 72% of the greenhouse gas total when you take away water vapor, but that is not clear at all. Also, water vapor can’t be regulated by
governments, and based on an earlier post I made today may be largely controlled by bacteria and fungi living in their ecosystem in the clouds. That
simply doesn't fit the AGW model.
[Edited on 8-24-2009 by Taco de Baja]
Truth generally lies in the coordination of antagonistic opinions
-Herbert Spencer
|
|
|
tigerdog
Nomad
Posts: 135
Registered: 12-7-2005
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Taco de Baja
Yeah, that explains why in AUGUST we are only up to Hurricane Bill for the Atlantic season. B as in the second one! No Hurricanes
for June...none in July...none in early August....That has only happened a handful of times since record keeping began. We should be up to Hurricane
Nicholas or Odette, based on that theory.
How about Seattle having such a COLD December last year the SNOW shut down the City Seattle most snow in a decade and the Mayor mishandled it so badly he just lost the runoff election Incumbent Loses 3rd Term Bid as Seattle’s Mayor….Maybe that cancelled out all the hot water in the Atlantic and decreased formation of hurricanes?
|
Taco, you're making the common mistake of confusing Climate with Weather. Though they are related, they are not synonyms. Here, from the NOAA,
explained so even a cave man can get it (that's a joke, son, not aimed at you):
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/pd/climate/factsheets...
And the fact that it's been a quiet year so far is fairly meaningless. For instance, in 1992 the first storm didn't form until late August, when
Hurricane Andrew hit southern Florida as a Category 5.
This is an El Nino year. Do some research on El Nino's effect on hurricane activity in the Atlantic Basin. I'll even give you a place to start: http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090806_hurricaneu...
\"You know Hobbes, sometimes even my lucky rocket-ship underpants don\'t help.\" - Calvin, from Calvin and Hobbes
Visit me at Rocky Point Tides
http://rptides.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
4
5
6
7
8
..
11 |
|
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
