Announcements
New Discussions
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 10 11
Re: Global warming [Re: canibul] #89571
11/17/06 09:21 AM
11/17/06 09:21 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 975
South Louisiana, USA
Clayton Offline
old hand
Clayton  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 975
South Louisiana, USA
Quote
you'll be able to buy land in Fourchon dirt cheap...

and I wish Waterworld was a series.


And how do you know about Fourchon? Most in Louisiana don't know about that place! I'll be down there in a couple of weeks (work) Always pick up fresh shrimp when I'm in the area... great for Gumbo
<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Clayton

-- Have You Seen This? --
Re: Global warming [Re: bvining] #89572
11/17/06 12:51 PM
11/17/06 12:51 PM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 893
W
waynemarlow Offline
old hand
waynemarlow  Offline
old hand
W

Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 893
Yes we certainly have had some change over the years, Hannibal and his elephants were rumoured to have crossed the alps to conquer was it Asia, now to cross the alps with elephants one would have had to have a mimimum of snow which at the point he was rumoured to have crossed has definately not been the case for many a year. The Thames at London used to freeze over and yet only 20 years before, the Chilterns, which are only 20 miles from London, was a large wine growing region and grapes need lots of sun and hot weather to grow well.

Now as to recycling explain this one for me. We need lots of trees to hoover all the CO2 that we produce from all those gas guzzlers in the States and all those coal fired power stations in China and yet we are told to recycle paper. Where does paper come from, why trees of course, so if we recycle paper by dunking it in chemicals to get rid of the ink and then wash and heat it in even more chemicals to whiten it as no one would buy brown recycled paper, then surely there will be less demand for paper and by consequence less trees will be grown so even by more consequence less trees to hoover up all that bad CO2 ?

Just maybe we don't yet fully understand what mother nature is throwing at us.

Re: Global warming [Re: bvining] #89573
11/18/06 08:07 AM
11/18/06 08:07 AM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 169
Upstate, South Carolina
SunnyZ Offline
member
SunnyZ  Offline
member

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 169
Upstate, South Carolina
The most concerning thing about global warming is the change in weather and climate not the rise in water. Northern Canadians might see disappearing arctic ice but Latin Americans see lethal storms and floods. The Europeans see glaciers disappearing, an increase in forest fires and fatal heat waves. Warmer oceans mean bigger hurricanes for us in the southern United States. My point is, it does not matter where you live or 'invest'. The affect is global.
Did you know that 19 of the warmest 20 years on record have been since 1980?

Re: Global warming [Re: SunnyZ] #89574
12/13/06 01:08 PM
12/13/06 01:08 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,582
“an island in the Pacifi...
hobie1616 Offline
Carpal Tunnel
hobie1616  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,582
“an island in the Pacifi...


US Sail Level 2 Instructor
US Sail Level 3 Coach
Re: Global warming [Re: SunnyZ] #89575
12/13/06 01:24 PM
12/13/06 01:24 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 975
South Louisiana, USA
Clayton Offline
old hand
Clayton  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 975
South Louisiana, USA
Quote
Did you know that 19 of the warmest 20 years on record have been since 1980?


And the record goes back to when? Lets see the earth is several million years old... man is not that old... evidence of previous ice ages... what caused those? Latest report I read shows that "COWS" not man emits more damaging gas (methane) that all of the fossil fuel burning means of transportation etc put together. SO LETS EAT THE COWS!!!
<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />
Now we've resorted to listening to POLITICIANS telling us what they think about the ozone and green house gasses. The SCIENTISTS can't agree, what makes us think the Politicians know what they are talking about!

Seriously, every report I've seen has a counter report disputing it. Bottom line, we need to protect our enviroment so our children can enjoy the earth as we have.


Peace to all!!

Merry Christmas! To all that celebrate the birth of Christ!
Happy Holidays to those that do not!
<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Clayton

Re: Global warming [Re: Clayton] #89576
03/14/07 10:05 PM
03/14/07 10:05 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Jake Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Jake  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Any of you seen "Inconvenient Truth"? It made me re-evaluate my conceptions a bit.


Jake Kohl
Re: Global warming [Re: Jake] #89577
03/15/07 04:30 AM
03/15/07 04:30 AM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 307
maui
jollyrodgers Offline
enthusiast
jollyrodgers  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 307
maui
our water seems a bit cooler out here too. is it because of all the ice that is melting?
no one has mentioned the concept of the sun flares which are creating more heat these days. even mars is hotter theses days according to scientists. no global tax could solve a prolem like that.
the inconvineint truth has the facts backwards acording to some analysts. increased co2 follows a global warming rather than causing it like the movie says. these globalist elite are famous for manipulating data to falsely prove their point. the magic bullet theory being a fine example of this technique.
the movie also fails to mention weather manipulation, which has been popular since th 60's and maybe before that. there have been russian scientists coming forward saying it was their job to make sure it didn't rain on the big parade. all different countries seeding clouds and monkeying with the weather could have unknow effects on someone else's weather.
the movie implies man is responsible for the warming, but many are saying man is only responsible for 2-6% of the change. cutting down trees any paving couldn't be helping the air quality. that would be like cutting out a lung on a person.
if they can gain some traction with the man made global warming theory and institute a global tax we would be that much closer to a global government. but would the taxmoney help cool the planet, or would it pay for weapons?

Re: Global warming [Re: jollyrodgers] #89578
03/15/07 07:16 AM
03/15/07 07:16 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Jake Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Jake  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Agreed - C02 levels and global temperature go hand in hand but how does a sun flare create more C02 exactly? Secondly, how can you explain that C02 levels right now are significantly higher than they have been in 40,000 years on this planet? Can you actually show me the scientific nay-sayers? I looked and am having difficulty actually finding the ones that have scientific background (and are not reporters or political in nature). Sure, I've found people that debate some of the details, but nobody that says that our technology isn't adversely influencing the planet.

[Linked Image]

Last edited by Jake; 03/15/07 07:36 AM.

Jake Kohl
Re: Global warming [Re: Jake] #89579
03/15/07 07:41 AM
03/15/07 07:41 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,114
BANNED
MauganN20 Offline
Carpal Tunnel
MauganN20  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,114
BANNED
Wow Jake.

You let Al Gore's propaganda piece get to you?

You know Al buys his "Carbon Credits" (to reduce his carbon footprint from his 20-room, $1500/mo electric bill mansion in Tennessee) from ... his own company.

Remember, always be skeptical of anyone purporting to be claiming "the truth".

Re: Global warming [Re: Jake] #89580
03/15/07 07:48 AM
03/15/07 07:48 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Wouter Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Wouter  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Actually their is a very simple reasoning that show the invalidate of any argument that go along the lines of "Earth is so and so many million years old and back then ...."

The Earth is 5 billion years old and for 60 % of the time it was a hot rocks surrounded by a poisonous cloud of surfur and other acid like components. Life didn't exist back then and carbon based lifeforms are ill equipped to survive in those conditions. That is despite the fact that some micro organism have managed to evolve into a beings that can survive harsh climates as volcanous and underwater hot vents. Both of which are downright fatal to 99 % of all other organism on this planet.

The operative section here is "... evolved into ...". This means that they had many generations to slowly adapt themselfs to live in these hot acid conditions. This, my sceptic friends is impossible for complex organisms like human beings to accomplish within a time frame of say less then a million years (=about 3000 generations). Therefor any significantly alteration of the conditions here on earth that proceeds faster then that time frame will have a very good chance of leading to extinction of the human species. EVEN THOUGH THE EARTH ITSELF AND IT FLORA AND FAUNA SURVIVED SIMILAR CONDITIONS JUST FINE IN ITS PAST.

Additionally, even if the human design can sustain itself in these new conditions then our societal structured may well not do so if the change is rapidly enough.

Maybe the environmental reports need to come with a similar disclaimer as the stock exchange advertisements. Results achieve in the past pose no garantee for the future.

Pretty much change is a given here on Earth and yes human beings do evolve continiously to adapt to these changing conditions, but it can only do so at a relatively slow speed. If the changes are much faster then that, ... well I think you see the problem here.

In todays worlds with our rigid societal structure we can't just pack up shop and move en masse to a different spot on the earth where conditions are more favourable. To local populace will not accept their own survival to be japordized by the refugies. The direct result will be wars and a whole lot of violance while the world at large readjusts to the new conditions. Probably decimating the human population at the same time.

And for what reason exactly ? Because people like reborn christian Bubba refuse to drive any sissy japanese car that gets a better mileage then the standard US V6 3 liter overweight pick-up truck.

Basically some dumb hack feels he is entitled to "risk it all" because he ... well, indeed, because he is what exactly ?

Ohh, how stupid of me to forget. Because he will not witness the hardships as the rapture will wisk him away just in time.

And I'm with Jake on this one. I have yet to find some peer-reviewed scientist to claim that the environmental problems are mere conjecture. There is an abundance of "think-tank" related pseudo scientist however and we all know how dependable they have turned out to be lately.

Wouter

Last edited by Wouter; 03/15/07 07:50 AM.

Wouter Hijink
Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild)
The Netherlands
Re: Global warming [Re: Wouter] #89581
03/15/07 08:03 AM
03/15/07 08:03 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,114
BANNED
MauganN20 Offline
Carpal Tunnel
MauganN20  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,114
BANNED
Quote
Because people like reborn christian Bubba refuse to drive any sissy japanese car that gets a better mileage then the standard US V6 3 liter overweight pick-up truck.


One can only hope that you become a hood ornament on a truck such as this.

Re: Global warming [Re: MauganN20] #89582
03/15/07 08:12 AM
03/15/07 08:12 AM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,187
38.912, -95.37
_flatlander_ Offline
old hand
_flatlander_  Offline
old hand

Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,187
38.912, -95.37
Al Gore exhales CO2. Everyone must do what they can but...Gore can't "Walk the walk"

from tennesseepolicy.org
Quote
Al Gore’s Personal Energy Use Is His Own “Inconvenient Truth”
Gore’s home uses more than 20 times the national average

Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.

Gore’s mansion, located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).

In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.

The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.

Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.

“As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk the walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use,” said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson.

In total, Gore paid nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for his Nashville estate in 2006.


###

­­­­­­­­­­
The Tennessee Center for Policy Research is an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization committed to achieving a freer, more prosperous Tennessee through free market policy solutions.


John H16, H14
Re: Global warming [Re: Jake] #89583
03/15/07 08:16 AM
03/15/07 08:16 AM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 806
Toronto, Ontario
pitchpoledave Offline
old hand
pitchpoledave  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 806
Toronto, Ontario
Guys, I would like to start a movement to stop the next ice age. 2 degrees colder for us in canada means 2km of ice on our head. no thanks.

Re: Global warming [Re: MauganN20] #89584
03/15/07 10:29 AM
03/15/07 10:29 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Jake Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Jake  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Quote
Wow Jake.

You let Al Gore's propaganda piece get to you?

You know Al buys his "Carbon Credits" (to reduce his carbon footprint from his 20-room, $1500/mo electric bill mansion in Tennessee) from ... his own company.

Remember, always be skeptical of anyone purporting to be claiming "the truth".


Fine, but this is all static. Debate with me the fact that humans are dramatically increasing C02 on the planet and that the US is the worst, by FAR, contributor. Not only that, but even IF all this is crap, we're in the back of the classroom on even considering the ramification's and acting to try and do what we can.

You can't guarantee me that our influence on the atmosphere isn't going to throw us into some pretty dramatic climate changes. On the other hand, neither can those who say that our influences are going to make dramatic differences. However, given that if one of the two sides is correct, we're about to experience some pretty tough times as a species, wouldn't you err on the side of caution?


Jake Kohl
Re: Global warming [Re: _flatlander_] #89585
03/15/07 10:34 AM
03/15/07 10:34 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 975
South Louisiana, USA
Clayton Offline
old hand
Clayton  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 975
South Louisiana, USA
As he is a politician, I tend to disregard anything they say as "truth". I also agree that if someone that utilizes more energy in a year than I will use in my life shouldn't be telling me that "I" need to cut back. Give me a break!!!

That doesn't mean toss out the baby with the bath water, we should all be mindful of "our" world but how do we get correct and "truthful" information. Last I heard was that COWS are causing the global warming with all their flatulance! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I say eat more cows reduce the gas!

WHATEVER... give me something I can really believe as truth and I'm behind ya, otherwise lets go sailing!!!!


Clayton

Yeah, I drive a TRUCK! But its what I work in/with.

Re: Global warming [Re: Clayton] #89586
03/15/07 01:11 PM
03/15/07 01:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,590
Naples, FL
waterbug_wpb Offline
Carpal Tunnel
waterbug_wpb  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,590
Naples, FL
So let's see...

Solar flare activity on the sun is on the upswing trend.

More solar radiation causes minor increases in seasonal temperature averages

Atmospheric temperature increases influence sea temperature

70% of earth's surface is water. Most CO2 ends up in the ocean (as various species - HCO3, H2CO3, CaCO3, etc)

Solubility of CO2 in seawater is strongly inverse of its temperature (decreases as temperature rises)

CO2 comes out of solution and enters atmosphere

Increased CO2 acts to hold in radiative heat from land mass

I'm not getting in to the political debat as to whether man controls global warming or not...

I think that humans are contributing to the problem, but not to the extent that nature is. That being said, I doubt it is our power to control the phenomenon

The CEO of Shell says we've got at least 50 years of oil left (at current production) before the company has to consider itself as "something other than an oil company", which I interpret as the point when alternative fuel production outpaces petroleum production.

So, we could very well see a shift in the petroleum based economy in our lifetime (or at least in our progeny's lifetime)

Perhaps the question is "are you on the leading edge or the trailing edge of this next shift?"

I presume Bubba and his truck will be on the trailing edge, and need government support until he finally has to conform to the new paradigm.


Jay

Re: Global warming [Re: waterbug_wpb] #89587
03/15/07 01:59 PM
03/15/07 01:59 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 101
chesapeake bay
davidn Offline
member
davidn  Offline
member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 101
chesapeake bay
From Jake: [/quote]given that if one of the two sides is correct, we're about to experience some pretty tough times as a species, wouldn't you err on the side of caution? [/quote]

Your premise assumes that the increase in CO2 is going to cause major negative changes in a short period of time which is very debated. That the earth is getting warmer is acknowledged, however, one should remember that is was very much warmer in the middle ages (Greenland was called that for a good reason; it wasn't just clever marketing by Eric the Red). There was also a mini ice age in colonial times.

Second, every action/decision is essentially an economic one wherein cost/benefit analyses are made. For example, we can drastically reduce, if not eliminate, highway fatalities (numbering in the 10s of thousands per year in the US) by setting a 30mph speed limit everywhere. We don't do that because the costs are too great for the benefits achieved (we as a country are willing to sacrifice thousands of lives for the greater benefits of driving faster than 30mph). The "greenies" don't apply any such analysis to the warming situation. The mantra seems to be, "climate change is bad, doubly so if humans have anything to do with it, so we must stop it at any costs".

The third problem I see is that it is, as you point out, not sure that measures to limit CO2 output will have any effect.

You state that given the terrible consquences (not proven) we should take these steps. However, if one looks closely at the possible outcomes of fully implementing CO2 controls (applying the Kyoto agreements?) very severe economic consequences may follow that could devastate 3rd world economies.

One should remember that 99 members of congress in a democratic administration refused to ratify the Kyoto agreements because they understood that they had very negative consequences for the US economy. This agreement also didn't address the coming major contributor, China, which is now obviously making the biggest increases in CO2 output, and polution.

The "greenies" hubris in thinking that they can control the earth's temperature is stunning. The UN statement that they will mandate that temperatures rise no more than 2 degrees over the next 20 years (I think that time frame is correct) shows great ignorance or psychopathic delusion. One would not have to be a "reborn Christian bubba", or paranoid to think that there might just be another agenda at work here; increasing statism in the world, inflicting a blow to capitalism and the US in particular (as the greatest example of the success of capitalism and democracy, as imperfect as it is).

Postscript; a well credentialed atmospheric scientist has recently stated a hypothesis that he researched and discovered much evidence to support, which is that greenhouse gasses actually are a mechanism by which the earth is kept from getting too hot. Quite the opposite from what is being shouted today. Just another example of the lack of certainty of the warming proponent's theories.

David
A cat and big cat

Re: Global warming [Re: davidn] #89588
03/15/07 02:33 PM
03/15/07 02:33 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Jake Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Jake  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
OK...so at what point would you guys suggest consideration should be given to change? When Greenland is completely unfrozen? When the ice caps are gone? At what point is it too late to affect change? You've gone from "there's no problem" to "even if there is a problem, there's nothing we can do about it so we shouldn't try".

Look, I was a really big skeptic at the beginning of the film and I really annoyed Bonnie by going "yeah, well...he says that but you can look at that another way" through half of the thing. While there are some disputable pieces of information, there are some really interesting points...BIG points about how our current administration looks at the "economics" of the Kyosho treaty. How we make make and accept excuses that for our auto makers to make more fuel efficient cars would be to destroy the big automakers. Also how the freakin' head of a petroleum institute becomes ecological adviser, makes a huge ethical mistake by "editing" a scientific report, resigns, and goes to work for Exxon the very next day, and so on. Big oil is at the top and as long as they are making the determination of what is too much of an "economical consequence" (Kyosho Treaty), that's going to mean of consequence to the oil industry...not you and not me. Cars are still going to sell if they get 50 mpg. Electricity might get a little more expensive, but I'll still be designing and selling case packing equipment. It's the oil that will not sell in the same vast quantities if we become more efficient. We are glaringly falling behind the rest of the world in this respect.

I would like you skeptics to watch the thing, then come back and discuss. At the very least, it stays relatively entertaining (and the guy is refreshingly capable of speaking coherently)

Last edited by Jake; 03/15/07 02:38 PM.

Jake Kohl
Re: Global warming [Re: Jake] #89589
03/15/07 03:17 PM
03/15/07 03:17 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,590
Naples, FL
waterbug_wpb Offline
Carpal Tunnel
waterbug_wpb  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,590
Naples, FL
I usually try to learn much about both sides of an issue before making a judgement, and if this film is truely of a scientific (and not editorial) nature, I'd be in line to see it.

Everyon'e got an agenda these days, and no one has the time to develop their own opinion. I mean, really, who out there has read ALL of that literature? Isn't it much easier to just swallow what someone else puts together?

Hell, we've got more talk about which F18 design is faster, and you'd think that the answer would be cut and dried stuff - based on engineering fact.




Last edited by waterbug_wpb; 03/15/07 03:40 PM.

Jay

Re: Global warming [Re: waterbug_wpb] #89590
03/15/07 03:40 PM
03/15/07 03:40 PM
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,074
Northfield,NH USA
bullswan Offline
Pooh-Bah
bullswan  Offline
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,074
Northfield,NH USA
This is the best documentary I've seen on the subject.
Explains correlations (or supposed correlations-Al Gore)
I'd like to hear a debate on the topic without the rhetoric.



http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...indle&hl=en


The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised. - George Will
"It's not that liberals aren't smart, it's just that so much of what they know isn't so" -Ronald Reagan
Page 4 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 10 11

Moderated by  Damon Linkous 

Search

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 142 guests, and 110 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Darryl, zorro, CraigJ, PaulEddo2, AUS180
8150 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics22,405
Posts267,058
Members8,150
Most Online2,167
Dec 19th, 2022
--Advertisement--
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1