Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Economy

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 08-24-2011, 09:21 PM
Oerets's Avatar
Oerets Oerets is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Derby City U.S.A.
Posts: 5,108
On this issue I would rather be considered being over cautious then foolhardy by the future inhabitants with the planet we left to them!




Barney
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-24-2011, 09:27 PM
Charles Charles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by mezz View Post
There have now been four major scares in either direction within the past 100 years. Two prophesising a massive warming and two a massive cooling.

Among the few things we do know for sure about it, the climate has been changing quite dramatically since the rise of mammals. We aren't sure what causes ice ages or warmer periods (like the one we are in now) to occur but it certainly isn't us because we've only been contributing to the emission of gases into the atmosphere in any noticeable quantity within the last 150 years or so.

In any event and without getting into any GW science (which is extremely and embarrassingly flawed) an ice event is going to be 1000 times more devasting to human life on the planet than warming (which might actually be quite beneficial to us despite all the absolute B.S. that the moronic Al Gore and his fanatical supporters would like you to believe). Since we are statistically overdue for an ice age now perhaps we should be preparing for that instead (maybe figuring out how we can warm the planet if that is even possible instead of wasting cycles on a huge heap global warming lies).
Well shit.

Reckon I can forget about selling you them carbon credits I got stuck with after Big Al's scam folded.

Hey Oerets, want a real deal on some carbon credits??? It's your big chance to save the planet and be sanctimonious at 50 cents on the dollar!!!

Just kidding, they put smart ass in the water down here in Bugtussell. I can't help myself at times.

Chas
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-25-2011, 08:03 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
The only reason nuclear is dead here is the reliance on high pressure enhanched urainium reactors. It most certainly is not dead in Canada with the CANDU reactor that uses unenriched uranium, in fact it could even burn the spent fuel from our reactors.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-25-2011, 09:47 AM
d-ray657's Avatar
d-ray657 d-ray657 is offline
Loyal Opposition
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,349
Quote:
Originally Posted by mezz View Post
There have now been four major scares in either direction within the past 100 years. Two prophesising a massive warming and two a massive cooling.

Among the few things we do know for sure about it, the climate has been changing quite dramatically since the rise of mammals. We aren't sure what causes ice ages or warmer periods (like the one we are in now) to occur but it certainly isn't us because we've only been contributing to the emission of gases into the atmosphere in any noticeable quantity within the last 150 years or so.

In any event and without getting into any GW science (which is extremely and embarrassingly flawed) an ice event is going to be 1000 times more devasting to human life on the planet than warming (which might actually be quite beneficial to us despite all the absolute B.S. that the moronic Al Gore and his fanatical supporters would like you to believe). Since we are statistically overdue for an ice age now perhaps we should be preparing for that instead (maybe figuring out how we can warm the planet if that is even possible instead of wasting cycles on a huge heap global warming lies).
Care to explain how climate science is "embarrassingly flawed?" Is this a conclusion you have reached on you own analysis, or do you rely on the scientific opinions of others? If it is based on your own analysis, you might want to enlighten us on your scientific training so that we might have some perspective when we evaluate your view in comparison to the view of the scientists that have spent years and years studying the subject. If it is the opinions of others upon which you rely, you might share the sources that support your conclusion about the flawed nature of climate science. Might those sources be Rick Perry or Michelle Bachman?

Frankly, your apparent need to demean those who hold an opposing view seems to demonstrate a significant lack of confidence in the ability of your opinions to survive on their own merits.

Regards,

D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-25-2011, 10:43 AM
mezz mezz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657 View Post
Care to explain how climate science is "embarrassingly flawed?" Is this a conclusion you have reached on you own analysis, or do you rely on the scientific opinions of others? If it is based on your own analysis, you might want to enlighten us on your scientific training so that we might have some perspective when we evaluate your view in comparison to the view of the scientists that have spent years and years studying the subject. If it is the opinions of others upon which you rely, you might share the sources that support your conclusion about the flawed nature of climate science. Might those sources be Rick Perry or Michelle Bachman?

Frankly, your apparent need to demean those who hold an opposing view seems to demonstrate a significant lack of confidence in the ability of your opinions to survive on their own merits.

Regards,

D-Ray
Before weighing in on the topic some 7 or 8 years ago I open mindedly studied the available science being used to explain the advent of alarm over Anthropological Global Warming in adequate enough depth to formulate my own conclusions.

In summary the science is inconclusive enough on so many levels and points imo as to render alarmism on the issue as an elaborate and particularly irresponsible (in that people try to pass it off as the truth) travesty.

From the sobering application of geological time, to issues with claims about the absorption characteristics of various atmospheric gases and the behavour of their molecules in relation to radiation retention, as well as widely assumptive deductions with regards to the interactions and interdependencies of atmospheric greenhouse gases and their effects on one another including the completely theoretical premise of positive feedback, to glaring lack of completeness of any and all atmospheric models relied upon by IPCC scientists studying the issue, the science, by necessity is so speculative and creative as to better resemble an elaborate artistic indulgence for entertainment (as boring as it is) than any objective and measured scientific endeavour. Coming from a professional background rooted in mathematic science one would be inclined to view these conclusions supposedly gleaned from the prevailing science as applied to AGW theory to be premature at best, dishonest at worst, and embarrassing at the very least.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-25-2011, 05:01 PM
electronjohn's Avatar
electronjohn electronjohn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by merrylander View Post
The only reason nuclear is dead here is the reliance on high pressure enhanched urainium reactors. It most certainly is not dead in Canada with the CANDU reactor that uses unenriched uranium, in fact it could even burn the spent fuel from our reactors.
And then there's the "thorium cycle". As engineering types like to say..."technically-sweet". Thorium's far more abundant than uranium, requires little processing & no expensive (and proliferation-prone) enrichment, and much simpler & safer reactor designs. And, the ability to re-burn spent conventional nuclear fuel is built right in. Better get on the stick, USA...India's putting their eggs in the thorium basket.
__________________
Irritatingly Inconsistent
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-25-2011, 07:33 PM
djv8ga djv8ga is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Open Border
Posts: 5,126
That's the coolest avatar ever. It's perfect for this place.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-26-2011, 12:18 AM
bhunter's Avatar
bhunter bhunter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Diego California
Posts: 3,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by djv8ga View Post
That's the coolest avatar ever. It's perfect for this place.
Here's a headstone that I thought was funny: BTW, I'm not directing this at anyone here!

__________________
Dear Optimist: Unless life gives you water and sugar too, your lemonade will suck.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-26-2011, 12:48 AM
d-ray657's Avatar
d-ray657 d-ray657 is offline
Loyal Opposition
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,349
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhunter View Post
Here's a headstone that I thought was funny: BTW, I'm not directing this at anyone here!

That's excellent. Kinda reminds me of this:



Regards,

D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-26-2011, 07:45 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
is He telling us summat?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg weather alert.jpg (49.0 KB, 4 views)
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:32 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.