- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Educate me on Climate Change
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:12 am to RandySavage
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:12 am to RandySavage
Based on the responses you have received thus far you should see that this was the wrong place to ask for unbiased insight on human caused climate change. The repeated myths and examples of ignorance really demonstrate the mental laziness that exist in our society. You'll be better off seeking unbiased views on it like that of corporations and entities that do not profit from climate change directives and infact will lose money if they get it wrong. Hell, watch a debate between scientist on the subject.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:13 am to RandySavage
It gets hot in the summer and cold in the winter.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:18 am to Homesick Tiger
My compliments to three posters with great summaries of parts of the picture.
A decent thread.
A decent thread.
This post was edited on 3/3/17 at 7:18 am
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:21 am to Jimmy2shoes
Polar Bear population INCREASING ... how about that?
quote:
30,000 polar bears is a lot. As someone else remarked (remind me where and I’ll link to it), when Al Gore was born the population was just 5,000. Even as recently as 2005 it was estimated at no more than 22,500.
When the population of something explodes six-fold in 70 years that’s a sign that it’s doing pretty well, right? In fact, frankly, at that point it ceases to be a species in any kind of danger and starts to look more like a pest.
quote:
According to this modelling polar bears would face a dramatic population decline in response to diminishing summer sea ice levels. Well of course: garbage in, garbage out. If your models are predicated on an untruth – that polar bears are reliant for their survival on summer sea ice – then clearly what they will prove is nonsense.
Inevitably – again, just like the climate alarmists’ models of runaway global warming – the polar bear population decline models have now hit the brick wall of reality.
Far from falling, the latest observational research has shown, polar bear populations have increased.
quote:
The polar bears are doing just fine. Better than fine.
It’s time the Trump Administration put an end to the nonsense whereby the US Fish and Wildlife service is effectively acting as an official propagandist for Greenpeace.
It’s time the greenies found an endangered species to champion that actually is genuinely threatened by climate change. They may be some time. As far as I’m aware, there isn’t a species on the planet that is genuinely threatened by climate change. But if any otherwise unemployable environmental sciences and conservation biology graduates want to brave malaria, candiru fish and ebola while seeking out such tragic victims of man’s selfishness and greed, I think we can all agree here that they should go right ahead.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:23 am to CelticDog
quote:
My compliments to three posters with great summaries of parts of the picture.
A decent thread.
Simplicity is often the best answer isn't it?
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:23 am to Homesick Tiger
The problem is that we are focusing on the wrong thing. We are too concerned with temperature since it is something that we can accurately measure now. We need to be focused on emissions (CO2, heavy metals, etc). We should be trying to strive for clean air and water. The temperature will work itself out. Right now, all we have are stupid carbon credits which just creates a shell game and doesn't do anything to curtail emissions. This just lines the pockets of politicians.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:27 am to RandySavage
quote:The climate has always been changing. /thread
Educate me on Climate Change
Posted on 3/3/17 at 7:57 am to RandySavage
even though you asked for
... everyone will be an expert, everyone will offer an opinion, and no one will be able to definitely prove any of it. Nor will any amount of arguing effect this issue any more than talking about water change the way a boat floats.
Me, myself, (IMHO) I tend to look at this as more a global warning (rather than warming) argument. Where it's more about environmental destruction (than simply temperature swings) and is being used by producers of CO2 in an attempt to circumvent (or prevent) laws concerning environment protection. It's an assault on a much bigger issue, and by breaking down the serious discussion into bite sized talking points, they've diluted the main issue through misdirection. It's a tactic, it's divide and conquer. And by focusing on what's the hardest to comprehend or see, we're avoiding the rest of what we might need to take a hard look at.
Temperature change is one merely one facet of environmental concern, one single issue that has become a mantra. IT'S THE LUMPING TOGETHER OF ALL THINGS ENVIRONMENTAL. Until now all the rest is lost in headlines.
Serious issues like allowing our water resources to become like those of Europe, where you are told not to even brush you teeth with the stuff from a tap, are being pushed aside or lumped into a large winner take all basket. It's become a be-all to end-all stance, in order to avoid the larger discussion, to avoid talking pollution in general. To avoid discussing deforestation, or biodiversity, or of over fishing, or genetic modifications in the environment.... It's the catch all phrase of our day and the guys with the most to gain or loose (us) are being herded into inaction because we've allowed big business to define the argument for us. It's like a felon hollering 'THIEF' in a crowded mall and then stuffing his pocket when everyone is looking somewhere else. It's part bait and switch -n- part shell game combined.
quote:
... those who think climate change is not an issue or is not real or not a big deal can you explain why ...
... everyone will be an expert, everyone will offer an opinion, and no one will be able to definitely prove any of it. Nor will any amount of arguing effect this issue any more than talking about water change the way a boat floats.
Me, myself, (IMHO) I tend to look at this as more a global warning (rather than warming) argument. Where it's more about environmental destruction (than simply temperature swings) and is being used by producers of CO2 in an attempt to circumvent (or prevent) laws concerning environment protection. It's an assault on a much bigger issue, and by breaking down the serious discussion into bite sized talking points, they've diluted the main issue through misdirection. It's a tactic, it's divide and conquer. And by focusing on what's the hardest to comprehend or see, we're avoiding the rest of what we might need to take a hard look at.
Temperature change is one merely one facet of environmental concern, one single issue that has become a mantra. IT'S THE LUMPING TOGETHER OF ALL THINGS ENVIRONMENTAL. Until now all the rest is lost in headlines.
Serious issues like allowing our water resources to become like those of Europe, where you are told not to even brush you teeth with the stuff from a tap, are being pushed aside or lumped into a large winner take all basket. It's become a be-all to end-all stance, in order to avoid the larger discussion, to avoid talking pollution in general. To avoid discussing deforestation, or biodiversity, or of over fishing, or genetic modifications in the environment.... It's the catch all phrase of our day and the guys with the most to gain or loose (us) are being herded into inaction because we've allowed big business to define the argument for us. It's like a felon hollering 'THIEF' in a crowded mall and then stuffing his pocket when everyone is looking somewhere else. It's part bait and switch -n- part shell game combined.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 8:04 am to Tyrusrex
quote:
You do have to take one thing on faith. Scientists across a vast spectrum of disciplines (Forestry, Glaciology, Botany, Oceanography, Agriculture, Zoology, Geology and many others) are not lying to us that the earth is warming up at an unnatural rate
What does natural rate even mean? Without the influence of man? Here's the last 450,000 years, point to natural warming on this graph.
The willful ignorance on this subject is baffling.
This post was edited on 3/3/17 at 8:05 am
Posted on 3/3/17 at 9:47 am to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
What does natural rate even mean? Without the influence of man? Here's the last 450,000 years, point to natural warming on this graph.
Two seconds to google:
LINK
Posted on 3/3/17 at 9:52 am to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:You keep saying this is a brief warming period, and I was about to counter with the Vostock data. You clearly understand that this isn't a brief warming period. So why do you keep saying that?
Yes it is, as you would expect during a brief warming trend.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 9:53 am to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:That you think this image is some sort of boom only proves you don't know how to read charts.
What does natural rate even mean? Without the influence of man? Here's the last 450,000 years, point to natural warming on this graph.
Divide 450,000 by 1576 (the pixel width of the graph portion as I just measured in paint) and you get 285.5. Every individual pixel on that graph stands for three centuries.
We've warmed a full degree in one century. That would be vertical with respect to the graph's scale, not simply steep. Plus it breaks the natural cycle illustrated by that chart since we're already at the crest of an interglacial and therefore would expect a slow cooling, not a double bump of even-more-rapid warming.
(The fact that it misspells "anomalies" and is sourced to climatedata.info rather than the actual EPICA paper is also a bit of a red flag, since skeptics tend to "accidentally" frick up baselines and such when "reproducing" these graphs. But I recognize the overall pattern so I'll work with the broad strokes for now.)
This post was edited on 3/3/17 at 9:59 am
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:03 am to Iosh
Fear of "the climate" is a mental disorder.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:05 am to Dale51
quote:
Fear of "the climate" is a mental disorder.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:06 am to RandySavage
It's the greatest hoax ever foisted on humanity to enrich the global elite.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:14 am to RandySavage
In an isolated global atmospheric system as that of Earth, in hydrostatic equilibrium in the cosmic vacuum, heat is transmitted only in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics, the thermal and conductive properties of different components, such as ocean waters, soils, and atmospheric gases, and the atmospheric adiabatic gradient.
Therefore, the so-called "greenhouse effect" and pseudo-mechanisms, such as "back radiation," have no scientific basis and are contradicted by all laws of physics and thermodynamics, including calorimetry, yields of atmospheric gases’ thermodynamic cycles, entropy, heat flows to the Earth's surface, wave mechanics, and the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.
Would you require more details or is this sufficient?
Therefore, the so-called "greenhouse effect" and pseudo-mechanisms, such as "back radiation," have no scientific basis and are contradicted by all laws of physics and thermodynamics, including calorimetry, yields of atmospheric gases’ thermodynamic cycles, entropy, heat flows to the Earth's surface, wave mechanics, and the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.
Would you require more details or is this sufficient?
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:20 am to RandySavage
quote:
Educate me on Climate Chang
Cow farts, truck nuts, and volcanos.
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:21 am to Asharad
All irrational fears stem from psychological disorders. Don't you agree?
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:21 am to ljhog
quote:
In an isolated global atmospheric system as that of Earth
Posted on 3/3/17 at 10:28 am to Iosh
Shhhhhh, IQ > 100 required for entry into the conversation. Sorry aggie.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News