Page 3 of 32 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 787
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    3,353
    Quote Originally Posted by BGnight View Post
    <snip> There's probably an equal chance we return to an ice age event in that time.
    Based on what evidence?

    <snip> replacing nuclear power, (a way bigger threat to humanity than any climate concerns)
    WTF?

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Durango, CO
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by k2skier112 View Post
    Yes.
    Weather and climate are different, you should educate yourself
    Oooooohh, passive aggressive confrontation. Cool!

    Actually I have educated myself, but thank you for the condescension and redirection of my comment! Totally unexpected.

    I worked internationally as an exploration geologist, specializing in the effect of paleo-climate changes on fluvial sedimentology. You? High school science?

    Riddle me these:

    What was the proper global temperature and when did that last happen? October 23, 4004 BC (you obviously know the reference), 1850 in the last little ice age, January 7, 1950 (my birthday) or last Tuesday? Are we too warm or too cold right now? Why or why not? What if the current climate is too cold (historically) right now? Is it blatant hubris to argue one way or another?

    When was "sea level" at the proper level? Is it too high or too low right now. It goes up and down over time, right? When do you think we started to accurately measure it?

    When in the last 10,000 years was the amount of polar ice "right"?

    When was the last time it was a good idea to insure buildings and support their reconstruction in the California forests or on the SE American coastal areas? Never?

    How far back in history do you trust the technology of environmental marker measurements? 500 years? 100 years? 50 years? Last Tuesday?

    Is change inherently good or bad? That is a simple question.

    Do you admit to a political bias in this issue? Nevermind, that really doesn't matter, does it?

    "Science" only has meaning when you have an understanding of the combination of time, history, popular educational focus, proper methodology and technology, population levels, and an appreciation of the effect of politics versus technology (study the Church and Galileo to start).

    FWIW, you know the real problem is excessive population, not lifestyle, don't you? Or not. Maybe we are on the way to the "proper" global environmental balance, but you can't refute it, one way or another.

    Please show your work.


    Edit: Maybe I just had too much rum tonight and made up all of that. Or not. But you don't really know, do you?

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by FatChance; 02-21-2019 at 08:28 PM.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bozeman
    Posts
    979
    ^^ Definitely too much rum. Start here: https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/hig...rview/overview

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ross Thompson's land
    Posts
    572
    There are those that would tell you in all seriousness that one of the results of global warming is colder temperatures.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bozeman
    Posts
    979

    Very Bad News on Climate

    January 2019 was cold in many parts of the US, but globally (global warming, get it) it was the 3rd warmest January since 1880, when records were first kept. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/global-climate-201901

    Yes, changing weather patterns can make some places colder at times while other places are hotter. The trend, however, is ever warmer.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bozeman
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by BGnight View Post
    That's all I need to read. They can't predict weather correctly 48 hours out, but I'm supposed to believe winters will disappear in 80 years?
    "Weather is the day-to-day state of the atmosphere, and its short-term variation in minutes to weeks. People generally think of weather as the combination of temperature, humidity, precipitation, cloudiness, visibility, and wind. ... Climate is the weather of a place averaged over a period of time, often 30 years." https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/arctic-...tml#difference

    Getting a weather forecast wrong 48 hours in advance is pretty different from seeing and predicting long term climate trends.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ross Thompson's land
    Posts
    572
    See I wasn’t kidding, they really do exist.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    6
    Fuck stick here
    FatChance, interesting post, i agree it's about population

    http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ quite a few countries getting busy
    Last edited by V0NZIPPER; 02-22-2019 at 12:15 AM.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    28
    We are doomed!
    Name:  doomed.PNG
Views: 424
Size:  23.9 KB
    >FatChance, interesting post, i agree it's about population
    I totally agree. Let's do something! I declare March 16th @ 1pm as "Let's Jump Day".
    All of us will ride the highest chairlift over rocks (to be sure!) and we'll all off ourselves at the same time.
    To sweetin the pot, No More F'n from now until then.
    If we do this at least we'll make up for all those bastards still using straws.
    Let Gravity Be Your Guide....

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    here and there
    Posts
    13,893
    I think you had the correct amount of rum.

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,021
    A good explanation of Climate vs. Weather for those that confuse the two.


  12. #62
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by FatChance View Post
    Oooooohh, passive aggressive confrontation. Cool!

    Actually I have educated myself, but thank you for the condescension and redirection of my comment! Totally unexpected.

    I worked internationally as an exploration geologist, specializing in the effect of paleo-climate changes on fluvial sedimentology. You? High school science?

    Riddle me these:

    What was the proper global temperature and when did that last happen? October 23, 4004 BC (you obviously know the reference), 1850 in the last little ice age, January 7, 1950 (my birthday) or last Tuesday? Are we too warm or too cold right now? Why or why not? What if the current climate is too cold (historically) right now? Is it blatant hubris to argue one way or another?

    When was "sea level" at the proper level? Is it too high or too low right now. It goes up and down over time, right? When do you think we started to accurately measure it?

    When in the last 10,000 years was the amount of polar ice "right"?

    When was the last time it was a good idea to insure buildings and support their reconstruction in the California forests or on the SE American coastal areas? Never?

    How far back in history do you trust the technology of environmental marker measurements? 500 years? 100 years? 50 years? Last Tuesday?

    Is change inherently good or bad? That is a simple question.

    Do you admit to a political bias in this issue? Nevermind, that really doesn't matter, does it?

    "Science" only has meaning when you have an understanding of the combination of time, history, popular educational focus, proper methodology and technology, population levels, and an appreciation of the effect of politics versus technology (study the Church and Galileo to start).

    FWIW, you know the real problem is excessive population, not lifestyle, don't you? Or not. Maybe we are on the way to the "proper" global environmental balance, but you can't refute it, one way or another.

    Please show your work.


    Edit: Maybe I just had too much rum tonight and made up all of that. Or not. But you don't really know, do you?

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    LOL! Triggered....someone ranting irrational isn't worth debating. Go back to watching Fox Opinions

    Oh, please educate yourself on climate and weather, you look and sound like a troll

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by El Kanone View Post
    See I wasn’t kidding, they really do exist.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    what caused the polar vortex to move over the US?

  14. #64
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    the vails
    Posts
    1,888
    This thread is really bringing out the retards with their heads in the sand.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    cow hampshire
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by zartagen View Post
    This thread is really bringing out the retards with their heads in the sand.
    I'm pretty sure the jongs and fox viewers are smarter and more edumedicated than this group - https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    3,353
    Quote Originally Posted by jackstraw View Post
    I'm pretty sure the jongs and fox viewers are smarter and more edumedicated than this group - https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
    Srsly. I suggested to a friend of a friend that they consult the CDC for adverse-effect statistics of HPV vaccines *instead* of using realfarmacy dot com - you can guess the response.

    "You can't trust things the gubmint publishes."


  17. #67
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    3,335
    Quote Originally Posted by FatChance View Post
    Oooooohh, passive aggressive confrontation. Cool!

    Actually I have educated myself, but thank you for the condescension and redirection of my comment! Totally unexpected.

    I worked internationally as an exploration geologist, specializing in the effect of paleo-climate changes on fluvial sedimentology. You? High school science?

    Riddle me these:

    What was the proper global temperature and when did that last happen? October 23, 4004 BC (you obviously know the reference), 1850 in the last little ice age, January 7, 1950 (my birthday) or last Tuesday? Are we too warm or too cold right now? Why or why not? What if the current climate is too cold (historically) right now? Is it blatant hubris to argue one way or another?

    When was "sea level" at the proper level? Is it too high or too low right now. It goes up and down over time, right? When do you think we started to accurately measure it?

    When in the last 10,000 years was the amount of polar ice "right"?

    When was the last time it was a good idea to insure buildings and support their reconstruction in the California forests or on the SE American coastal areas? Never?

    How far back in history do you trust the technology of environmental marker measurements? 500 years? 100 years? 50 years? Last Tuesday?

    Is change inherently good or bad? That is a simple question.

    Do you admit to a political bias in this issue? Nevermind, that really doesn't matter, does it?

    "Science" only has meaning when you have an understanding of the combination of time, history, popular educational focus, proper methodology and technology, population levels, and an appreciation of the effect of politics versus technology (study the Church and Galileo to start).

    FWIW, you know the real problem is excessive population, not lifestyle, don't you? Or not. Maybe we are on the way to the "proper" global environmental balance, but you can't refute it, one way or another.

    Please show your work.


    Edit: Maybe I just had too much rum tonight and made up all of that. Or not. But you don't really know, do you?

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Riddle me this.. When in the last 100,000 years has the average global temperature increased and ice caps decreased at a greater rate than post 1900 AD.. WITHOUT AN EXTREMELY CATACLYSMIC EVENT like a super volcano or meteor strike? Yes, there have been other times things got hot and things got cold, but never this fast without a distinct and explicable root cause event.
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bozeman
    Posts
    979
    Hey FatChance,

    Here are some answers to your questions from NASA https://climate.nasa.gov/news/1010/c...ivilizations/:

    • Earth’s climate has been stable for the past 12,000 years. This stability has been crucial for the development of modern civilization.

    • A stable climate enabled humans to pursue agriculture, domesticate animals, settle down and develop culture.

    • Space observations, combined with archaeology and climate science, give us clues as to how ancient civilizations, like that of the Mayans and the Old Kingdom of Egypt, collapsed.

    • Climate change (drought in particular) has been at least partly responsible for the rise and fall of many ancient civilizations.

    • Our way of life depends on a stable climate. Faced with a changing climate, we must learn the lessons of past collapsed civilizations and adapt.


    And then this: https://www.vox.com/2015/12/12/98942...ange-explained

    "Notice the relatively flat line over the past 10,000 years — that's when agriculture began:

    Name:  still_forpost.0.jpg
Views: 342
Size:  46.2 KB

    "Modern humans appeared around 200,000 years ago. 188,000 years later, they started farming, independently in at least four different parts of the world. Civilization followed shortly thereafter. . .
    "Despite plenty of regional climate variations — some of which contributed to the fall of great civilizations — temperatures and sea levels have been stable enough for agriculture to lead to society and for society to eventually lead to industrialization, science, medicine, the internet, and the device you're using to read these words. Now, with man-made global warming, we are tossing that stability away."

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Reno
    Posts
    1,129
    Quote Originally Posted by k2skier112 View Post
    Go back to watching Fox Opinions
    JFC, why don't you throw in "MAGA hat wearing racist" while you're at it?
    You know it's possible to be a socially "progressive", empathetic, environmentally concerned, scientifically minded human while at the same time understanding that climate science has been corrupted at least a little for the sole purpose of satisfying nefarious political agendas. Al Gore being one of the most blatant red flags. The same people all you alarmists are hoping will "fix" the climate (politicians/billionaires) don't give a flying fuck about the earth and only have monetary concerns in mind. It's the same idiotic naivety that thinks electing morons like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders will make things better.

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    4,699
    I’m quite happy with the current temperatures.

    Whoops, guess I need to pick a side. Am I outraged at the climate change alarmists overreacting or the climate change deniers overreacting to the alarmists.

    Ugh!! So much outrage and no where to put it.

    Can I be a climate agnostic? But then I have no sheep to join.

    Life is hard.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bozeman
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by BGnight View Post
    JFC, why don't you throw in "MAGA hat wearing racist" while you're at it?
    You know it's possible to be a socially "progressive", empathetic, environmentally concerned, scientifically minded human while at the same time understanding that climate science has been corrupted at least a little for the sole purpose of satisfying nefarious political agendas.
    No, this isn't possible.

    Al Gore being one of the most blatant red flags.
    Huh? Pushing climate change hasn't done much for his political career.

    The same people all you alarmists are hoping will "fix" the climate (politicians/billionaires) don't give a flying fuck about the earth and only have monetary concerns in mind. It's the same idiotic naivety that thinks electing morons like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders will make things better.
    Not alarmists, realists.

    And I don't think billionaires will fix the climate, but I am quite hopeful to see the power of youth movements such as those from Sunrise Movement and Greta Thunberg and see the potential that they will lead to real change. Greta is a hero, and electing more politicians like AOC (also a hero for speaking truth to power) and Bernie is the only way we will solve this problem.

    Failure is not an option.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bozeman
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by AK47bp View Post
    I’m quite happy with the current temperatures.
    Bummer for you, then, cuz it is going to change, and rather rapidly.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    4,699
    Quote Originally Posted by WMD View Post
    Bummer for you, then, cuz it is going to change, and rather rapidly.
    Well, shit.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the swamp
    Posts
    6,270
    But the northern US will be so nice and warm during the winter. 70° mid winter days in NYC. Everyone there will be so happy.

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SF & the Ho
    Posts
    5,674
    Quote Originally Posted by The SnowShow View Post
    But the northern US will be so nice and warm during the winter. 70° mid winter days in NYC. Everyone there will be so happy.
    Probably more people than you think rationalize it that way. I think there are quite a few people/ policy makers that are being two faced denying climate change in the hopes of that type of result. Mainly opening up the northwest passage and all the potential a less icy Arctic Ocean would create.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •