Started By
Message

re: Educate me on Climate Change

Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:28 am to
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40191 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:28 am to
quote:

Climate change is real and happens without humans (ask a geologist about the various ice ages). However, humans have sped it up by emitting CO2 and simultaneously cutting down the rain forest (which captures CO2 naturally).



Cutting down the rain forests have a YUUGE impact but what has just as big of an impact is the loss of wetlands worldwide. Wetlands are the 2nd best carbon sequesters (just behind tropical rain forests), and they protect low lying areas from hurricanes, storms that create extra high tides, and sea level rise in general.

quote:

The problem is the left have latched onto it to promote their cultural Marxist agenda, and that agenda is more of an imminent danger than the climate change itself.


True but hopefully after this year the global left will be out of power enough country's that are driving that bs agenda.

quote:

In the end, I think the issue will solve itself -- that is, it will be solved by entrepreneurs like Elon Musk who is working on electric cars, as well as a concerted effort among international scientists to get fusion plants up and running (France is opening a fusion plant for test runs sometime in the 2020's).

In the meantime we need to start adopting more fail-safe, passively cooled nuclear plants. The plants we have now were designed in the 1940's and are old technology. There are better designs out there that do not rely on active cooling (which can fail). Go to youtube and watch some lectures about Thorium plants. It looks very promising and we already know how to do it today. The problem is getting them approved by the NRC and going through all the crazy red tape.


The energy and carbon emissions issue will eventually solve itself. Technology will make us more efficient and if the world switched to nuclear and natural gas or if carbon capture technology can make coal as clean as natural gas, emissions won't be a problem. However, the issue that will have a YUUGE impact in the future is our failure to learn from past disasters and adjust accordingly. 20 years before Katrina, "experts" were warning the Corp of Engineers that NOLA's levees could and would fail in a major storm, but the Corp, Congress, multiple Presidents, multiple governors, multiple mayors, did nothing to strengthen the levees in those 20 years. Ca spent the ~30yrs from the end of the last major drought to the start of the most recent drought doing nothing to prepare for the next drought, and now it looks like they will do the same after this drought. There are many more examples like those in the USA and around the world that occurred before "runaway climate change" is suppose to have an impact. If "runaway climate change" has any impact at all then the world will be in trouble because we failed to learn the lessons of past natural disasters.
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:34 am to
quote:

Cutting down the rain forests have a YUUGE impact but what has just as big of an impact is the loss of wetlands worldwide.
Good thing Trump's budget cuts state wetland protection grants
This post was edited on 3/3/17 at 10:35 am
Posted by Dale51
Member since Oct 2016
32378 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:40 am to
quote:

Good thing Trump's budget cuts state wetland protection grants


You're an evolution denier...a climate evolution denier. You want to keep things like they were in some idealized past. What are you afraid of?
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:42 am to
This take is hotter than the sun ljhog doesn't think exists
Posted by llfshoals
Member since Nov 2010
15529 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:47 am to
quote:

You clearly understand that this isn't a brief warming period. So why do you keep saying that?

We have had 7 brief warming periods just in the last 10,000 years. All of which peaked at warmer temperatures than now.

So yes, until this proves to be a sustained increase it could definitely just be another spike. There is zero evidence at this point to support any conjecture on that.

If previous history is an indicator (and it has every other time in history) temperature average will increase 15ish degrees C when we do shift back to a hot phase, and there isn't a single thing man can do to prevent it.
This post was edited on 3/3/17 at 10:59 am
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40191 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:00 am to
quote:

Good thing Trump's budget cuts state wetland protection grants



They need cutting because their is so much fork, waste and fraud in them that it is not even funny. It cost $2,000/acre - $90,000/acre with an average of $18,000/acre to restore saltwater wetlands in 1997 and $56,000/acre in 2014. I know that each project has different factors that affect the costs, but those do not explain the massive price jumps. The only thing that explains the massive price jumps is the same thing that explains why ever other government project takes too long and costs too much; government red tape and not caring about the costs.
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:03 am to
quote:

We have had 7 brief warming periods just in the last 10,000 years. All of which peaked at warmer temperatures than now.



(From Marcott 2013.)
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:04 am to
quote:

It cost $2,000/acre - $90,000/acre with an average of $18,000/acre to restore saltwater wetlands in 1997 and $56,000/acre in 2014. I know that each project has different factors that affect the costs, but those do not explain the massive price jumps. The only thing that explains the massive price jumps is the same thing that explains why ever other government project takes too long and costs too much; government red tape and not caring about the costs.
I would think the price jumps could be explained by the earlier projects picking the low-hanging fruit such that later wetlands restoration sites are more difficult and expensive.
This post was edited on 3/3/17 at 11:05 am
Posted by llfshoals
Member since Nov 2010
15529 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:20 am to
As many times as I've beat you to death with this you'd think you would have learned by now.

After I get off work I'll dig up the ice core studies.....again and post them.....again.

Posted by boomertoomer
Member since Dec 2016
451 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:26 am to
at best?...pure bullshite....at worst?...the means to extort a lot of money for a very few people...
Posted by bamarep
Member since Nov 2013
51811 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:28 am to
Here's the Cliffs.


The Earth's climate has been changing for eons.

Liberals figured out a way to make money off of it.


Any questions?
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40191 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:28 am to
quote:

I would think the price jumps could be explained by the earlier projects picking the low-hanging fruit such that later wetlands restoration sites are more difficult and expensive.





They could except for the fact that the EPA which handles wetland restoration wastes money like a drunken sailor on shore leave and the fact that according to the GAO the federal government wasted $125billion in 2014. Given those facts there is not one objective or sane person that would say that the costs increases are just due to more difficult and expensive projects. Trump is 100% right to cut the EPA and force it to do more with less.
Posted by League Champs
Bayou Self
Member since Oct 2012
10340 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:41 am to
quote:

Good thing Trump's budget cuts state wetland protection grants

LoL

At one point, most of Colorado was a wetland

No amount of govt spending was going to effect that, either way
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57383 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:47 am to
quote:

Educate me on Climate Change
Start with a good thermo class. Follow with heat transfer.

This isn't the place for it.
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:53 am to
quote:

As many times as I've beat you to death with this you'd think you would have learned by now.

After I get off work I'll dig up the ice core studies.....again and post them.....again.
Marcott used ice cores, it's a multi-proxy average. He used Law Domes C + F, Vostok, and EPICA. LINK

So if your play is to grab a single proxy and use the noise in the deuterium signal over the last 10 kyr as proof of rapid global Holocene swings, I wouldn't bother.
This post was edited on 3/3/17 at 11:59 am
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 11:57 am to
quote:

They could except for the fact that the EPA which handles wetland restoration wastes money like a drunken sailor on shore leave and the fact that according to the GAO the federal government wasted $125billion in 2014.
Nothing in either of those links is specific to the wetlands projects.
Posted by UHTiger
Member since Jan 2007
5231 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 12:20 pm to
Yeah you've come to the right place. I just assume you are trolling. If you really want to know, do some research. Don't trust the slated crap you'll get on poli board. This place is utterly devoid of rational, unbiased thought
Posted by TejasHorn
High Plains Driftin'
Member since Mar 2007
10986 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 12:24 pm to
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40191 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 12:30 pm to
quote:

Nothing in either of those links is specific to the wetlands projects.


Why do you need specific for wetlands? Waste and irresponsible spending is a systemic problem in the federal government especially the EPA. Why would you think wetland programs be any different?
Posted by WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
44071 posts
Posted on 3/3/17 at 12:47 pm to
quote:

Would you require more details or is this sufficient?

More details.

Perhaps some discussion on how the atmosphere has no effect on infra-red radiation back into space.

I think you've been studying too many black bodies.

first pageprev pagePage 5 of 5Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram