|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
On 11/22/2016 5:12 PM, wrote:
Frank - There is no question that we are in a warming period. Ah. Some, of course, still insist that there is a question. I don't know where they think the glaciers are hiding. The question is: does MAN have any effect on it and that is NOT believed by the vast majority of scientists ... Oh, those dummies at NASA! http://www.space.com/34637-global-wa...asa-video.html Do you have any questions about there being records of three other warming periods in the past of times warmer than at present? Or that we haven't had any measurable warming for the last 19 years? I certainly have a question about that latter statement. It disagrees with everything I've seen - except, perhaps, Breitbart. Even Faux News and that rude guy with the funny hair seem to have accepted the idea. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 17:19:00 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote: On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 4:02:51 PM UTC-8, wrote: On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 2:58:11 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 2:12:39 PM UTC-8, wrote: On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 4:04:25 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/21/2016 5:23 PM, wrote: On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 5:45:12 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/20/2016 3:48 PM, wrote: On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 12:04:32 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/20/2016 12:58 PM, wrote: Only a tiny percentage of climatologists believe in man-made global warming. Perhaps HALF of them believe in climate change. Cite? Wikipedia for a start: John Cook et al., 2013 Cook et al. examined 11,944 abstracts from the peer-reviewed scientific literature from 1991–2011 that matched the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'.[12] They found that, while 66.4% of them expressed no position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), of those that did, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are contributing to global warming. If you're referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey...climate_change (which is where I find your quote) you seem to be interpreting it backwards. -- - Frank Krygowski I must say that you had to work pretty hard to get that. Try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scient...climate_change I found my link very easily. IIRC, it took two tries in Wikipedia. But the important thing is, it says the opposite of what you claimed. So does the link you just provided. So we still don't have a link corroborating "Only a tiny percentage of climatologists believe in man-made global warming," etc. I suppose it's possible that the U.S. government is prohibiting the publishing of papers that disprove anthropogenic climate change. And so is the government of Britain. And France. And Germany. And Japan. And Australia. And New Zealand. Etc., etc. Well, I suppose that's all _possible_. Thank God we have had the major oil corporations funding the truth! ;-) (Although even they seem to be caving in to the universal conspiracy!) -- - Frank Krygowski Frank - There is no question that we are in a warming period. The question is: does MAN have any effect on it and that is NOT believed by the vast majority of scientists and almost none of the lay people who are a great deal more clever than given credit for. Let me reiterate - Oxygen composes 21% of the atmosphere and has a higher latent head content than CO2 that a change of 100 ppm is being claimed to be harmful. Water composes 70% of the surface of the Earth in liquid or solid form and 4% of the atmosphere in gaseous form. Moreover water absorbs almost the entire IR to UV spectrum whereas CO2 has a very narrow band of absorption almost exactly in between the emission spectrum of the Sun and the "reflective" spectrum of the Earth. What's more the "charts" showing absorption and bandwidth are ALL misrepresentations since NONE of them show the actual values of absorption. The entire CO2 in the atmosphere holds virtually NONE of the Earth's heat. Hence changes in the levels are inconsequential as far as "climate" is concerned. Exactly what are you questioning? If any reality then perhaps you can explain why none (NONE) of those supporting warming because of CO2 can predict anything at all? Have you noticed that they have now decided to "predict" 100 years in the future "if this continues as it is"? Do you have any questions about there being records of three other warming periods in the past of times warmer than at present? Or that we haven't had any measurable warming for the last 19 years? Does this mean we have carte blanche to cut down the rain forest? I sure hope so, because I love that ****ty furniture from Pier One. I am firmly convinced that any policy that prevents me from doing whatever the f*** I want is wrong and part of a conspiracy to enslave the world. Everywhere I turn, it's ZOG, or the Trilateralists or the Illuminati. I am sure that the Knights Templar stole my Sunday Oregonian. I can't wait for Trump to drain the swamp -- and fill it, and build a hotel! -- Jay Beattie. Here is a what AGW is all about: "On Sunday, Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and IPCC Co-chair of Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change, told the Neue Zürcher Zeitung (translated) that “climate policy is redistributing the world's wealth” and that “it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization.” Edenhofer went on to explain that in Cancun, the redistribution of not only wealth but also natural resources will be negotiated" We can read in dozens of places on the Internet about how 1& of the world's population own 80% of the wealth. Now what is that supposed to mean? Do you suppose they keep it in a lock box under their beds? This is nothing more than communist propaganda. Who CARES what someone ostensibly "owns"? This money DIES if it is not working. And it works by providing jobs to the rest of the entire world. If you were to take ALL of the world's complete wealth and equally distribute it to all on this globe each person would recieve $7500 and ONLY $1,000 would be in cash. How long do you suppose you could survive on a grand in cash and 3 1/2 square inches of San Francisco property? I don't know. I think 3 1/2 square inches of San Francisco property is worth more than my house. I could get a reverse mortgage and live comfortably for the rest of my life -- which would be short because of my imminent murder by the sinister globalists. I can hear them now . . . circling . . . in my head. Without these tycoons NO ONE would have the money to even die. I'm not even going to bother listing the tycoons who have sodomized this country. Not that there aren't good tycoons. Some of my best friends are tycoons, and one day they just refused to show up to tycoon work. It was terrible. I and the other little people had to go foraging for nuts and berries -- whatever we could find to keep us alive until the world was rid of oppressive regulation and ready for the return of the tycoons. -- Jay Beattie. Actually it is the Tycoons that are the innocent victims. If you do a bid of due diligence you will discover that behind every tycoon there stands a lawyer and before the Tycoon approves anything he consults the lawyer. And, it might be noted, that standing right next to the lawyer is the tax expert and the Tycoon does nothing at all until these two individuals have given the nod. So, don't blame the Tycoon, blame the two who nod their heads. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 23:28:27 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 11/22/2016 5:12 PM, wrote: Frank - There is no question that we are in a warming period. Ah. Some, of course, still insist that there is a question. I don't know where they think the glaciers are hiding. The question is: does MAN have any effect on it and that is NOT believed by the vast majority of scientists ... Oh, those dummies at NASA! http://www.space.com/34637-global-wa...asa-video.html Do you have any questions about there being records of three other warming periods in the past of times warmer than at present? Or that we haven't had any measurable warming for the last 19 years? I certainly have a question about that latter statement. It disagrees with everything I've seen - except, perhaps, Breitbart. Even Faux News and that rude guy with the funny hair seem to have accepted the idea. Admittedly I haven't made a study of it but from a casual look it appears that it is getting warmer. And, apparently, at least some if it can be blamed on CO2 in the atmosphere. And, I saw some estimates on the amount of CO2 released during the most recent eruption of a volcano in Indonesia and 24 hours of that volume makes the efforts of mankind look positively anemic. On the other hand, it might be possible to control , to some extent, man made CO2 :-) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
Admittedly I haven't made a study of it but from a casual look it
appears that it is getting warmer. And, apparently, at least some if it can be blamed on CO2 in the atmosphere. And, I saw some estimates on the amount of CO2 released during the most recent eruption of a volcano in Indonesia and 24 hours of that volume makes the efforts of mankind look positively anemic. http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/.../07_02_15.html Our studies show that globally, volcanoes on land and under the sea release a total of about 200 million tonnes of CO2 annually. This seems like a huge amount of CO2, but a visit to the U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) website (http://cdiac.ornl.gov/) helps anyone armed with a handheld calculator and a high school chemistry text put the volcanic CO2 tally into perspective. Because while 200 million tonnes of CO2 is large, the global fossil fuel CO2 emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes. Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 11:33:51 PM UTC-8, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 17:19:00 -0800 (PST), jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 4:02:51 PM UTC-8, wrote: On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 2:58:11 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 2:12:39 PM UTC-8, wrote: On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 4:04:25 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/21/2016 5:23 PM, wrote: On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 5:45:12 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/20/2016 3:48 PM, wrote: On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 12:04:32 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/20/2016 12:58 PM, wrote: Only a tiny percentage of climatologists believe in man-made global warming. Perhaps HALF of them believe in climate change. Cite? Wikipedia for a start: John Cook et al., 2013 Cook et al. examined 11,944 abstracts from the peer-reviewed scientific literature from 1991–2011 that matched the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'.[12] They found that, while 66.4% of them expressed no position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), of those that did, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are contributing to global warming. If you're referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey...climate_change (which is where I find your quote) you seem to be interpreting it backwards. -- - Frank Krygowski I must say that you had to work pretty hard to get that. Try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scient...climate_change I found my link very easily. IIRC, it took two tries in Wikipedia. But the important thing is, it says the opposite of what you claimed.. So does the link you just provided. So we still don't have a link corroborating "Only a tiny percentage of climatologists believe in man-made global warming," etc. I suppose it's possible that the U.S. government is prohibiting the publishing of papers that disprove anthropogenic climate change. And so is the government of Britain. And France. And Germany. And Japan. And Australia. And New Zealand. Etc., etc. Well, I suppose that's all _possible_. Thank God we have had the major oil corporations funding the truth! ;-) (Although even they seem to be caving in to the universal conspiracy!) -- - Frank Krygowski Frank - There is no question that we are in a warming period. The question is: does MAN have any effect on it and that is NOT believed by the vast majority of scientists and almost none of the lay people who are a great deal more clever than given credit for. Let me reiterate - Oxygen composes 21% of the atmosphere and has a higher latent head content than CO2 that a change of 100 ppm is being claimed to be harmful. Water composes 70% of the surface of the Earth in liquid or solid form and 4% of the atmosphere in gaseous form. Moreover water absorbs almost the entire IR to UV spectrum whereas CO2 has a very narrow band of absorption almost exactly in between the emission spectrum of the Sun and the "reflective" spectrum of the Earth. What's more the "charts" showing absorption and bandwidth are ALL misrepresentations since NONE of them show the actual values of absorption. The entire CO2 in the atmosphere holds virtually NONE of the Earth's heat. Hence changes in the levels are inconsequential as far as "climate" is concerned. Exactly what are you questioning? If any reality then perhaps you can explain why none (NONE) of those supporting warming because of CO2 can predict anything at all? Have you noticed that they have now decided to "predict" 100 years in the future "if this continues as it is"? Do you have any questions about there being records of three other warming periods in the past of times warmer than at present? Or that we haven't had any measurable warming for the last 19 years? Does this mean we have carte blanche to cut down the rain forest? I sure hope so, because I love that ****ty furniture from Pier One. I am firmly convinced that any policy that prevents me from doing whatever the f*** I want is wrong and part of a conspiracy to enslave the world. Everywhere I turn, it's ZOG, or the Trilateralists or the Illuminati. I am sure that the Knights Templar stole my Sunday Oregonian. I can't wait for Trump to drain the swamp -- and fill it, and build a hotel! -- Jay Beattie. Here is a what AGW is all about: "On Sunday, Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and IPCC Co-chair of Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change, told the Neue Zürcher Zeitung (translated) that “climate policy is redistributing the world's wealth” and that “it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization.” Edenhofer went on to explain that in Cancun, the redistribution of not only wealth but also natural resources will be negotiated" We can read in dozens of places on the Internet about how 1& of the world's population own 80% of the wealth. Now what is that supposed to mean? Do you suppose they keep it in a lock box under their beds? This is nothing more than communist propaganda. Who CARES what someone ostensibly "owns"? This money DIES if it is not working. And it works by providing jobs to the rest of the entire world. If you were to take ALL of the world's complete wealth and equally distribute it to all on this globe each person would recieve $7500 and ONLY $1,000 would be in cash. How long do you suppose you could survive on a grand in cash and 3 1/2 square inches of San Francisco property? I don't know. I think 3 1/2 square inches of San Francisco property is worth more than my house. I could get a reverse mortgage and live comfortably for the rest of my life -- which would be short because of my imminent murder by the sinister globalists. I can hear them now . . . circling . . . in my head. Without these tycoons NO ONE would have the money to even die. I'm not even going to bother listing the tycoons who have sodomized this country. Not that there aren't good tycoons. Some of my best friends are tycoons, and one day they just refused to show up to tycoon work. It was terrible. I and the other little people had to go foraging for nuts and berries -- whatever we could find to keep us alive until the world was rid of oppressive regulation and ready for the return of the tycoons. -- Jay Beattie. Actually it is the Tycoons that are the innocent victims. If you do a bid of due diligence you will discover that behind every tycoon there stands a lawyer and before the Tycoon approves anything he consults the lawyer. And, it might be noted, that standing right next to the lawyer is the tax expert and the Tycoon does nothing at all until these two individuals have given the nod. So, don't blame the Tycoon, blame the two who nod their heads. Yes (nodding my head). -- Jay Beattie. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
On 11/23/2016 2:33 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 23:28:27 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/22/2016 5:12 PM, wrote: Frank - There is no question that we are in a warming period. Ah. Some, of course, still insist that there is a question. I don't know where they think the glaciers are hiding. The question is: does MAN have any effect on it and that is NOT believed by the vast majority of scientists ... Oh, those dummies at NASA! http://www.space.com/34637-global-wa...asa-video.html Do you have any questions about there being records of three other warming periods in the past of times warmer than at present? Or that we haven't had any measurable warming for the last 19 years? I certainly have a question about that latter statement. It disagrees with everything I've seen - except, perhaps, Breitbart. Even Faux News and that rude guy with the funny hair seem to have accepted the idea. Admittedly I haven't made a study of it but from a casual look it appears that it is getting warmer. And, apparently, at least some if it can be blamed on CO2 in the atmosphere. And, I saw some estimates on the amount of CO2 released during the most recent eruption of a volcano in Indonesia and 24 hours of that volume makes the efforts of mankind look positively anemic. The NASA link I gave above included the effect of volcanoes. Check it out. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 8:28:33 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/22/2016 5:12 PM, wrote: Frank - There is no question that we are in a warming period. Ah. Some, of course, still insist that there is a question. I don't know where they think the glaciers are hiding. The question is: does MAN have any effect on it and that is NOT believed by the vast majority of scientists ... Oh, those dummies at NASA! http://www.space.com/34637-global-wa...asa-video.html Do you have any questions about there being records of three other warming periods in the past of times warmer than at present? Or that we haven't had any measurable warming for the last 19 years? I certainly have a question about that latter statement. It disagrees with everything I've seen - except, perhaps, Breitbart. Even Faux News and that rude guy with the funny hair seem to have accepted the idea. -- - Frank Krygowski Tell me Frank - aren't YOU the one that has said before that correlation is not causation? What's more, All of these "predictions" start with the premise that we are continuing to warm. We haven't for the last almost 19 years now. And they also make a rather telling statement "if this continues, by 2075" or equal statements. While we COULD be in a pause like we were in WW II, it is more likely that we are reaching the end of the warm period and are about to start a decline. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 9:36:35 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/23/2016 2:33 AM, John B Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 23:28:27 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/22/2016 5:12 PM, wrote: Frank - There is no question that we are in a warming period. Ah. Some, of course, still insist that there is a question. I don't know where they think the glaciers are hiding. The question is: does MAN have any effect on it and that is NOT believed by the vast majority of scientists ... Oh, those dummies at NASA! http://www.space.com/34637-global-wa...asa-video.html Do you have any questions about there being records of three other warming periods in the past of times warmer than at present? Or that we haven't had any measurable warming for the last 19 years? I certainly have a question about that latter statement. It disagrees with everything I've seen - except, perhaps, Breitbart. Even Faux News and that rude guy with the funny hair seem to have accepted the idea. Admittedly I haven't made a study of it but from a casual look it appears that it is getting warmer. And, apparently, at least some if it can be blamed on CO2 in the atmosphere. And, I saw some estimates on the amount of CO2 released during the most recent eruption of a volcano in Indonesia and 24 hours of that volume makes the efforts of mankind look positively anemic. The NASA link I gave above included the effect of volcanoes. Check it out. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change
considered Tue, 22 Nov 2016 14:12:36 -0800 (PST)
the perfect time to write: On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 4:04:25 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/21/2016 5:23 PM, wrote: On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 5:45:12 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/20/2016 3:48 PM, wrote: On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 12:04:32 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/20/2016 12:58 PM, wrote: Only a tiny percentage of climatologists believe in man-made global warming. Perhaps HALF of them believe in climate change. Cite? Wikipedia for a start: John Cook et al., 2013 Cook et al. examined 11,944 abstracts from the peer-reviewed scientific literature from 1991–2011 that matched the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'.[12] They found that, while 66.4% of them expressed no position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), of those that did, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are contributing to global warming. If you're referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey...climate_change (which is where I find your quote) you seem to be interpreting it backwards. -- - Frank Krygowski I must say that you had to work pretty hard to get that. Try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scient...climate_change I found my link very easily. IIRC, it took two tries in Wikipedia. But the important thing is, it says the opposite of what you claimed. So does the link you just provided. So we still don't have a link corroborating "Only a tiny percentage of climatologists believe in man-made global warming," etc. I suppose it's possible that the U.S. government is prohibiting the publishing of papers that disprove anthropogenic climate change. And so is the government of Britain. And France. And Germany. And Japan. And Australia. And New Zealand. Etc., etc. Well, I suppose that's all _possible_. Thank God we have had the major oil corporations funding the truth! ;-) (Although even they seem to be caving in to the universal conspiracy!) -- - Frank Krygowski Frank - There is no question that we are in a warming period. The question is: does MAN have any effect on it and that is NOT believed by the vast majority of scientists and almost none of the lay people who are a great deal more clever than given credit for. Let me reiterate - Oxygen composes 21% of the atmosphere and has a higher latent head content than CO2 that a change of 100 ppm is being claimed to be harmful. Water composes 70% of the surface of the Earth in liquid or solid form and 4% of the atmosphere in gaseous form. Moreover water absorbs almost the entire IR to UV spectrum whereas CO2 has a very narrow band of absorption almost exactly in between the emission spectrum of the Sun and the "reflective" spectrum of the Earth. What's more the "charts" showing absorption and bandwidth are ALL misrepresentations since NONE of them show the actual values of absorption. The entire CO2 in the atmosphere holds virtually NONE of the Earth's heat. Hence changes in the levels are inconsequential as far as "climate" is concerned. Exactly what are you questioning? If any reality then perhaps you can explain why none (NONE) of those supporting warming because of CO2 can predict anything at all? Have you noticed that they have now decided to "predict" 100 years in the future "if this continues as it is"? Do you have any questions about there being records of three other warming periods in the past of times warmer than at present? Or that we haven't had any measurable warming for the last 19 years? The 5 warmest years on record have all been since 2010, so it's hardly controversial, at least among people who look at the science instead of the uneducated rhetoric or outright lies of those with a vested interest in preserving the fossil fuel industry, even at the cost of the planet. Such people are traitors to the human race, and should be removed from it. And yes, that includes the idiot that the US broken electoral system has proclaimed as the president elect, despite more people voting for his opponent. How is that supposed to be democracy? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change | Phil Lee | Techniques | 8 | November 27th 16 01:57 AM |
Risk Management: WWIII vs Climate Change | DougC | Techniques | 36 | October 28th 16 11:39 PM |
We are the third leg of the stool to prevent Climate Change | Bill Sornson[_5_] | General | 1 | October 10th 09 06:07 PM |
We are the third leg of the stool to prevent Climate Change | Bill Sornson[_5_] | Techniques | 6 | September 27th 09 08:11 PM |