Puppeteer

Author Topic: Global Warming  (Read 40209 times)

Stan

  • Guest
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #45 on: January 14, 2009, 09:58:59 PM »
Hey!  You sound just like Mark Moranos!

I didn't mean that I agreed with the Kyoto accord in toto ship....However because I had no input to Kyoto, and don't have any influence on anyone that does, I prefer to concentrate on doing stuff that little old me can control.

1.) I can drive a small, "reused" relatively energy efficient car.  (40 years with 2 VW beetles, 15 years on the farm with a well used pickup propane powered)
2.) I can burn mostly wood and or pellets (carbon neutral, I can explain why they are carbon neutral if you wish)
3.) Not participate in the N. American pastime of purchasing everything I think I might want someday?
4.) I can live in a smaller, easier to heat, well insulated, less expensive house.
5.) I  influenced a couple of generations of school kids by spending 30 hours per week with them indoctrinating them in my philosophy  ::)
6.) I can eat mostly locally grown food cooked at home, in a healthy manner.

I can go on but don't want to bore you any more than I already have.  My point being is that if lots more people acted in a responsible manner, we'd be in better shape economically, as well as environmentally and we'd not have to depend upon politicians grandstanding at Kyoto type conferences.
Stan

t19

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Tanks and Lister... Heavy Metal
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #46 on: January 14, 2009, 10:39:40 PM »
Yeah I cannot understand this whole Cap and Trade thing.

It penalizes Canada because its F'n cold in the winter, and we are supposed to pay money to China (huge polluter) to by thier credits... now how the hell do they get credit??  Who proposed that silliness??

I drive a small car, as does my wife... built locally
I do my part too reduce pollution
There is plenty of room for all of Gods creatures... right next to the mashed potatoes...

t19

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Tanks and Lister... Heavy Metal
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #47 on: January 14, 2009, 11:01:14 PM »
Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979
Michael Asher (Blog) - January 1, 2009 11:31 AM

Rapid growth spurt leaves amount of ice at levels seen 29 years ago.

Thanks to a rapid rebound in recent months, global sea ice levels now equal those seen 29 years ago, when the year 1979 also drew to a close.

Ice levels had been tracking lower throughout much of 2008, but rapidly recovered in the last quarter. In fact, the rate of increase from September onward is the fastest rate of change on record, either upwards or downwards.

The data is being reported by the University of Illinois's Arctic Climate Research Center, and is derived from satellite observations of the Northern and Southern hemisphere polar regions.

Each year, millions of square kilometers of sea ice melt and refreeze. However, the mean ice anomaly -- defined as the seasonally-adjusted difference between the current value and the average from 1979-2000, varies much more slowly. That anomaly now stands at just under zero, a value identical to one recorded at the end of 1979, the year satellite record-keeping began.

Sea ice is floating and, unlike the massive ice sheets anchored to bedrock in Greenland and Antarctica, doesn't affect ocean levels. However, due to its transient nature, sea ice responds much faster to changes in temperature or precipitation and is therefore a useful barometer of changing conditions.

Earlier this year, predictions were rife that the North Pole could melt entirely in 2008. Instead, the Arctic ice saw a substantial recovery. Bill Chapman, a researcher with the UIUC's Arctic Center, tells DailyTech this was due in part to colder temperatures in the region. Chapman says wind patterns have also been weaker this year. Strong winds can slow ice formation as well as forcing ice into warmer waters where it will melt.

Why were predictions so wrong? Researchers had expected the newer sea ice, which is thinner, to be less resilient and melt easier. Instead, the thinner ice had less snow cover to insulate it from the bitterly cold air, and therefore grew much faster than expected, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center.

In May, concerns over disappearing sea ice led the U.S. to officially list the polar bear a threatened species, over objections from experts who claimed the animal's numbers were increasing.
There is plenty of room for all of Gods creatures... right next to the mashed potatoes...

t19

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Tanks and Lister... Heavy Metal
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #48 on: January 14, 2009, 11:11:03 PM »
Another good read... Let the ice age begin :D
Quote
Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age
11.01.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru

The earth is now on the brink of entering another Ice Age, according to a large and compelling body of evidence from within the field of climate science. Many sources of data which provide our knowledge base of long-term climate change indicate that the warm, twelve thousand year-long Holocene period will rather soon be coming to an end, and then the earth will return to Ice Age conditions for the next 100,000 years.

Ice cores, ocean sediment cores, the geologic record, and studies of ancient plant and animal populations all demonstrate a regular cyclic pattern of Ice Age glacial maximums which each last about 100,000 years, separated by intervening warm interglacials, each lasting about 12,000 years.

Most of the long-term climate data collected from various sources also shows a strong correlation with the three astronomical cycles which are together known as the Milankovich cycles. The three Milankovich cycles include the tilt of the earth, which varies over a 41,000 year period; the shape of the earth’s orbit, which changes over a period of 100,000 years; and the Precession of the Equinoxes, also known as the earth’s ‘wobble’, which gradually rotates the direction of the earth’s axis over a period of 26,000 years. According to the Milankovich theory of Ice Age causation, these three astronomical cycles, each of which effects the amount of solar radiation which reaches the earth, act together to produce the cycle of cold Ice Age maximums and warm interglacials.

Elements of the astronomical theory of Ice Age causation were first presented by the French mathematician Joseph Adhemar in 1842, it was developed further by the English prodigy Joseph Croll in 1875, and the theory was established in its present form by the Czech mathematician Milutin Milankovich in the 1920s and 30s. In 1976 the prestigious journal “Science” published a landmark paper by John Imbrie, James Hays, and Nicholas Shackleton entitled “Variations in the Earth's orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages,” which described the correlation which the trio of scientist/authors had found between the climate data obtained from ocean sediment cores and the patterns of the astronomical Milankovich cycles. Since the late 1970s, the Milankovich theory has remained the predominant theory to account for Ice Age causation among climate scientists, and hence the Milankovich theory is always described in textbooks of climatology and in encyclopaedia articles about the Ice Ages.

In their 1976 paper Imbrie, Hays, and Shackleton wrote that their own climate forecasts, which were based on sea-sediment cores and the Milankovich cycles, "… must be qualified in two ways. First, they apply only to the natural component of future climatic trends - and not to anthropogenic effects such as those due to the burning of fossil fuels. Second, they describe only the long-term trends, because they are linked to orbital variations with periods of 20,000 years and longer. Climatic oscillations at higher frequencies are not predicted... the results indicate that the long-term trend over the next 20,000 years is towards extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation and cooler climate."

During the 1970s the famous American astronomer Carl Sagan and other scientists began promoting the theory that ‘greenhouse gasses’ such as carbon dioxide, or CO2, produced by human industries could lead to catastrophic global warming. Since the 1970s the theory of ‘anthropogenic global warming’ (AGW) has gradually become accepted as fact by most of the academic establishment, and their acceptance of AGW has inspired a global movement to encourage governments to make pivotal changes to prevent the worsening of AGW.

The central piece of evidence that is cited in support of the AGW theory is the famous ‘hockey stick’ graph which was presented by Al Gore in his 2006 film “An Inconvenient Truth.” The ‘hockey stick’ graph shows an acute upward spike in global temperatures which began during the 1970s and continued through the winter of 2006/07. However, this warming trend was interrupted when the winter of 2007/8 delivered the deepest snow cover to the Northern Hemisphere since 1966 and the coldest temperatures since 2001. It now appears that the current Northern Hemisphere winter of 2008/09 will probably equal or surpass the winter of 2007/08 for both snow depth and cold temperatures.

The main flaw in the AGW theory is that its proponents focus on evidence from only the past one thousand years at most, while ignoring the evidence from the past million years -- evidence which is essential for a true understanding of climatology. The data from paleoclimatology provides us with an alternative and more credible explanation for the recent global temperature spike, based on the natural cycle of Ice Age maximums and interglacials.

In 1999 the British journal “Nature” published the results of data derived from glacial ice cores collected at the Russia ’s Vostok station in Antarctica during the 1990s. The Vostok ice core data includes a record of global atmospheric temperatures, atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gases, and airborne particulates starting from 420,000 years ago and continuing through history up to our present time.

The graph of the Vostok ice core data shows that the Ice Age maximums and the warm interglacials occur within a regular cyclic pattern, the graph-line of which is similar to the rhythm of a heartbeat on an electrocardiogram tracing. The Vostok data graph also shows that changes in global CO2 levels lag behind global temperature changes by about eight hundred years. What that indicates is that global temperatures precede or cause global CO2 changes, and not the reverse. In other words, increasing atmospheric CO2 is not causing global temperature to rise; instead the natural cyclic increase in global temperature is causing global CO2 to rise.

The reason that global CO2 levels rise and fall in response to the global temperature is because cold water is capable of retaining more CO2 than warm water. That is why carbonated beverages loose their carbonation, or CO2, when stored in a warm environment. We store our carbonated soft drinks, wine, and beer in a cool place to prevent them from loosing their ‘fizz’, which is a feature of their carbonation, or CO2 content. The earth is currently warming as a result of the natural Ice Age cycle, and as the oceans get warmer, they release increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Because the release of CO2 by the warming oceans lags behind the changes in the earth’s temperature, we should expect to see global CO2 levels continue to rise for another eight hundred years after the end of the earth’s current Interglacial warm period. We should already be eight hundred years into the coming Ice Age before global CO2 levels begin to drop in response to the increased chilling of the world’s oceans.

The Vostok ice core data graph reveals that global CO2 levels regularly rose and fell in a direct response to the natural cycle of Ice Age minimums and maximums during the past four hundred and twenty thousand years. Within that natural cycle, about every 110,000 years global temperatures, followed by global CO2 levels, have peaked at approximately the same levels which they are at today.

About 325,000 years ago, at the peak of a warm interglacial, global temperature and CO2 levels were higher than they are today. Today we are again at the peak, and near to the end, of a warm interglacial, and the earth is now due to enter the next Ice Age. If we are lucky, we may have a few years to prepare for it. The Ice Age will return, as it always has, in its regular and natural cycle, with or without any influence from the effects of AGW.

The AGW theory is based on data that is drawn from a ridiculously narrow span of time and it demonstrates a wanton disregard for the ‘big picture’ of long-term climate change. The data from paleoclimatology, including ice cores, sea sediments, geology, paleobotany and zoology, indicate that we are on the verge of entering another Ice Age, and the data also shows that severe and lasting climate change can occur within only a few years. While concern over the dubious threat of Anthropogenic Global Warming continues to distract the attention of people throughout the world, the very real threat of the approaching and inevitable Ice Age, which will render large parts of the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable, is being foolishly ignored.
There is plenty of room for all of Gods creatures... right next to the mashed potatoes...

lowspeedlife

  • old iron for a new age
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
  • no i'm not no cowboy
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #49 on: January 15, 2009, 01:59:00 AM »
Another good read... Let the ice age begin :D
Quote
Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age
11.01.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru

The earth is now on the brink of entering another Ice Age, according to a large and compelling body of evidence from within the field of climate science. Many sources of data which provide our knowledge base of long-term climate change indicate that the warm, twelve thousand year-long Holocene period will rather soon be coming to an end, and then the earth will return to Ice Age conditions for the next 100,000 years.

Ice cores, ocean sediment cores, the geologic record, and studies of ancient plant and animal populations all demonstrate a regular cyclic pattern of Ice Age glacial maximums which each last about 100,000 years, separated by intervening warm interglacials, each lasting about 12,000 years.

Most of the long-term climate data collected from various sources also shows a strong correlation with the three astronomical cycles which are together known as the Milankovich cycles. The three Milankovich cycles include the tilt of the earth, which varies over a 41,000 year period; the shape of the earth’s orbit, which changes over a period of 100,000 years; and the Precession of the Equinoxes, also known as the earth’s ‘wobble’, which gradually rotates the direction of the earth’s axis over a period of 26,000 years. According to the Milankovich theory of Ice Age causation, these three astronomical cycles, each of which effects the amount of solar radiation which reaches the earth, act together to produce the cycle of cold Ice Age maximums and warm interglacials.

Elements of the astronomical theory of Ice Age causation were first presented by the French mathematician Joseph Adhemar in 1842, it was developed further by the English prodigy Joseph Croll in 1875, and the theory was established in its present form by the Czech mathematician Milutin Milankovich in the 1920s and 30s. In 1976 the prestigious journal “Science” published a landmark paper by John Imbrie, James Hays, and Nicholas Shackleton entitled “Variations in the Earth's orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages,” which described the correlation which the trio of scientist/authors had found between the climate data obtained from ocean sediment cores and the patterns of the astronomical Milankovich cycles. Since the late 1970s, the Milankovich theory has remained the predominant theory to account for Ice Age causation among climate scientists, and hence the Milankovich theory is always described in textbooks of climatology and in encyclopaedia articles about the Ice Ages.

In their 1976 paper Imbrie, Hays, and Shackleton wrote that their own climate forecasts, which were based on sea-sediment cores and the Milankovich cycles, "… must be qualified in two ways. First, they apply only to the natural component of future climatic trends - and not to anthropogenic effects such as those due to the burning of fossil fuels. Second, they describe only the long-term trends, because they are linked to orbital variations with periods of 20,000 years and longer. Climatic oscillations at higher frequencies are not predicted... the results indicate that the long-term trend over the next 20,000 years is towards extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation and cooler climate."

During the 1970s the famous American astronomer Carl Sagan and other scientists began promoting the theory that ‘greenhouse gasses’ such as carbon dioxide, or CO2, produced by human industries could lead to catastrophic global warming. Since the 1970s the theory of ‘anthropogenic global warming’ (AGW) has gradually become accepted as fact by most of the academic establishment, and their acceptance of AGW has inspired a global movement to encourage governments to make pivotal changes to prevent the worsening of AGW.

The central piece of evidence that is cited in support of the AGW theory is the famous ‘hockey stick’ graph which was presented by Al Gore in his 2006 film “An Inconvenient Truth.” The ‘hockey stick’ graph shows an acute upward spike in global temperatures which began during the 1970s and continued through the winter of 2006/07. However, this warming trend was interrupted when the winter of 2007/8 delivered the deepest snow cover to the Northern Hemisphere since 1966 and the coldest temperatures since 2001. It now appears that the current Northern Hemisphere winter of 2008/09 will probably equal or surpass the winter of 2007/08 for both snow depth and cold temperatures.

The main flaw in the AGW theory is that its proponents focus on evidence from only the past one thousand years at most, while ignoring the evidence from the past million years -- evidence which is essential for a true understanding of climatology. The data from paleoclimatology provides us with an alternative and more credible explanation for the recent global temperature spike, based on the natural cycle of Ice Age maximums and interglacials.

In 1999 the British journal “Nature” published the results of data derived from glacial ice cores collected at the Russia ’s Vostok station in Antarctica during the 1990s. The Vostok ice core data includes a record of global atmospheric temperatures, atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gases, and airborne particulates starting from 420,000 years ago and continuing through history up to our present time.

The graph of the Vostok ice core data shows that the Ice Age maximums and the warm interglacials occur within a regular cyclic pattern, the graph-line of which is similar to the rhythm of a heartbeat on an electrocardiogram tracing. The Vostok data graph also shows that changes in global CO2 levels lag behind global temperature changes by about eight hundred years. What that indicates is that global temperatures precede or cause global CO2 changes, and not the reverse. In other words, increasing atmospheric CO2 is not causing global temperature to rise; instead the natural cyclic increase in global temperature is causing global CO2 to rise.

The reason that global CO2 levels rise and fall in response to the global temperature is because cold water is capable of retaining more CO2 than warm water. That is why carbonated beverages loose their carbonation, or CO2, when stored in a warm environment. We store our carbonated soft drinks, wine, and beer in a cool place to prevent them from loosing their ‘fizz’, which is a feature of their carbonation, or CO2 content. The earth is currently warming as a result of the natural Ice Age cycle, and as the oceans get warmer, they release increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Because the release of CO2 by the warming oceans lags behind the changes in the earth’s temperature, we should expect to see global CO2 levels continue to rise for another eight hundred years after the end of the earth’s current Interglacial warm period. We should already be eight hundred years into the coming Ice Age before global CO2 levels begin to drop in response to the increased chilling of the world’s oceans.

The Vostok ice core data graph reveals that global CO2 levels regularly rose and fell in a direct response to the natural cycle of Ice Age minimums and maximums during the past four hundred and twenty thousand years. Within that natural cycle, about every 110,000 years global temperatures, followed by global CO2 levels, have peaked at approximately the same levels which they are at today.

About 325,000 years ago, at the peak of a warm interglacial, global temperature and CO2 levels were higher than they are today. Today we are again at the peak, and near to the end, of a warm interglacial, and the earth is now due to enter the next Ice Age. If we are lucky, we may have a few years to prepare for it. The Ice Age will return, as it always has, in its regular and natural cycle, with or without any influence from the effects of AGW.

The AGW theory is based on data that is drawn from a ridiculously narrow span of time and it demonstrates a wanton disregard for the ‘big picture’ of long-term climate change. The data from paleoclimatology, including ice cores, sea sediments, geology, paleobotany and zoology, indicate that we are on the verge of entering another Ice Age, and the data also shows that severe and lasting climate change can occur within only a few years. While concern over the dubious threat of Anthropogenic Global Warming continues to distract the attention of people throughout the world, the very real threat of the approaching and inevitable Ice Age, which will render large parts of the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable, is being foolishly ignored.


   WOW! actual science on this subject! natural cycles who would have ever thought, how refreshing!  Thank you for that wonderful info T19.

 Today the news stated that the temp in parts of the northern U.S. is colder that the south pole! & friday i get to work all day in what is expected to be an 18 F high temperature day. right now i would love some global warming. Excuse me that should be "climate change"  notice how the name changes when the actual events don't meet the expectations?
 The whole thing is about stealing your liberty & your treasure, never allow government to take from you without a fight, they get used to doing it very fast & reclaiming such things are nearly impossible without bloodshed.
 I completely agree that more should be done to clean up the planet, when I was young you could not get near the potomac river because it smelled so bad, now people actually swim in the same river. big change in less than 30 years. Again we should clean up the planet but we need to work on things we have some control over, GLOBAL WARMING AIN'T ONE OF 'EM.


     Scott R.
Scott R.

5.7 liter diesel k-5 blazer. converting to wvo.
omega 20/2 listeroid

Stan

  • Guest
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #50 on: January 15, 2009, 02:14:30 AM »
If you really want something to be very afraid of, you should research the global marketplace and see just who owns stuff.  You'd be amazed at the small number of people that own a very large amount of the world!
Stan

mike90045

  • Mendocino Metro
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1594
  • Mmmm BBQ
    • View Profile
    • Mikes Solar PV page
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #51 on: January 15, 2009, 02:18:04 AM »
And the other new factor - weather stations are now in the centers of city "heat islands" of concrete and asphalt, and are reading higher than real ambient.

Stan

  • Guest
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #52 on: January 15, 2009, 02:49:31 AM »
Sounds like the "new" American government doesn't really believe all the nay-sayers on the global warming issue.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/europe-mainmenu-35/596

Stan

SHIPCHIEF

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #53 on: January 15, 2009, 04:38:24 AM »
Most people get global warming info from television, radio and newspaper reports and editorials.
This is heaped in to one group known as Mainstream Media.
Do Not accept that they spread honest information for the good of the listening masses.
They are no different than any other special interest group, like Big Oil, Forestry Products, Agrabuisness, Gay rights, Big Labor, etc.
They all have a product to sell and interests to protect while they work to advance their cause.
All of them employ armies of lobbiests to buy Political influence ahead of you.
Why would Mainstream Media be any more believable than any of the others? Because they TELL YOU THEY ARE?  :P
Understanding climate science takes some time and effort. EXACTLY. Just what you are not expected to invest your time in.
Taxing carbon is rediculous. You are made of the stuff (you ugly bags of mostly water  ;) ) and just about everything you suround yourself with does too. Carbon sequestering, Cap & Trade etc is INSULTING your intelligence.
Good Stewardship is the ticket. What we are being sold by politicians (tax hikes in disguise) "Scientists" (Grant chasers) and Dupes (who follow any feel good trend without any critical reading) is a waste of energy, time and money.
If global Ice Age is on our doorstep, a little AGW could stave it off for a while... ;D Won't the alarmists look foolish then? Nope, they just change tunes.
As Bob G stated, our generation was fed Global Ice Age. We have seen the switch and are sceptical, and have read the history of Global Alarmism. Just recently the Washington State Commission on Global Warming was refered as the Commission on Global Climate Change. Funny. They know what's happening too. They are just looking out for #1 (gotta keep that nice new State job!)
Thank you T19 for the post. The long view using a Solar system model seems more reliable and verifiable.
By the way; The Yellowstone Lake earthquakes last week were interesting...in as much as that is the world's largest volcanic caldera. It erupts on about a 600,000 year cycle. It's about 100,000 years overdue. It's nickname is "The Beast". I saw Mt St. Helens erupt, and I've flown over it many times. I own property between it and Mt Rainier. It was a piker, yet today it vents 2/3 of Washinton State's sulfer dioxide emmisions. Somebody ought to fine the State until they get up there and stuff a catalytic converter in it  :o Mt Pinotoba (sp?) was a lot more powerful. Makes mankind's output look puny, like All of mankind's output since the Industrial revolution, passed in a single blast. If The Beast erupts, no one will give a rip about AGW, but the DOE flaks will still try to levy fines. :D
Get some scale.
Keep it real, like cleaning up your rivers, exhaust pipes, watersheds, your own body.
Ashwamegh 25/2 & ST12
Lister SR2 10Kw 'Long Edurance' genset on a 10 gallon sump/skid,
Onan 6.5NH in an old Jeager Compressor trailer and a few CCK's

mobile_bob

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2940
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #54 on: January 15, 2009, 06:57:17 AM »
it would seem we could do for ourselves and leave the politicians to do what they do best, "nothing"!!

i don't like to polute, i love tree's, small animals and all that

i see no reason to crap in my nest of anyone elses for that matter,

seems like we can do the responsible thing without governments telling us, when, what, where and how, don't you think?

maybe not?

being solidly into the second half of my life, and planning an offgrid lifestyle with a small footprint
not because i am green particularly, but because i am getting more stingy, and don't like spending countless hours mowing
acres of lawn, painting endlessly, and paying huge property taxes.

rather than being told what we must do, maybe we lead by example?

maybe not?

probably not?

i will just continue to do the best i can, do my thing and work to get under the radar
maybe one day soon folks in town when asked about me will respond

"who?  oh you must mean the crazy old hermit fart up on that there hill!"

that will be the day that i will figure i have truely arrived!

maybe an underground home with a phone booth sitting on top?
i go in and dial a special number and the floor goes down into my bunker.
now that might be cool?

small enough foot print? whats a phone booth?  4'x4'?
mostly aluminum and glass, so it is recyclable!

the next 4 years are going to be miserable for this old fart, and i thought bill clinton was bad.

bob g
otherpower.com, microcogen.info, practicalmachinist.com
(useful forums), utterpower.com for all sorts of diy info

compig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1264
  • 1953 Lister CS 6/1 SOM owner
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #55 on: January 15, 2009, 11:15:05 AM »
If you really want something to be very afraid of, you should research the global marketplace and see just who owns stuff.  You'd be amazed at the small number of people that own a very large amount of the world!
Stan

Turn up the fear factor even more by finding out a/ how they aquired their wealth and b/ what the Banks did to cause the prevailing global financial crisis.
DON'T STEAL , THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T LIKE COMPETITION !!!
Lister A
Onan W3S Genny
Petter A1
Villiers C45 industrial
Continental flat six powerpacket
ANOTHER Lister 6/1 CS SOM , temporarily !!!

mkdutchman

  • mkdutchman at gmail dot com
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #56 on: January 15, 2009, 12:15:51 PM »
Quote
the next 4 years are going to be miserable for this old fart, and i thought bill clinton was bad.

This young fart can certainly feel your pain on that one.........am I the only young person who gets the "batten down the hatches" feeling, with the whackos taking office? Out of the frying pan into the fire comes to mind.

Underground houses? bob, this ones for you

http://www.missilebases.com/

Now if the price of those things would only come down......
« Last Edit: January 15, 2009, 12:19:33 PM by mkdutchman »

cognos

  • Guest
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #57 on: January 15, 2009, 03:49:22 PM »
I suppose, as a believer that global warming is real, I could go on a wild cut 'n paste rampage and "prove" that "My"- opinion is the correct one. But it wouldn' be "my' opinion, would it - it would just be what I've been fed, because all such information is the product of such lightweight sources as TV and newspapers, and not from any "real" sources, or I'd smarten the hell up and think right.
 You'd think that someone would put a stop to all this conspiracy theory crap put out by the "mainstream media" who are part of a larger conspiracy with the right-wing anti-capitalist greenie Obama-ite dumocrap Liberal paid-off whack jobs masquerading as scientists, leading poor sheep such as myself around to erroneous conclusions.

Boy, I musta been sum stoopid.

Wel, I've sertainly lerned sumthing frum this thred. Thanks!

I leave you to it.

compig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1264
  • 1953 Lister CS 6/1 SOM owner
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #58 on: January 15, 2009, 06:07:22 PM »


Underground houses? bob, this ones for you

http://www.missilebases.com/

Now if the price of those things would only come down......

If I thought I could get a green card to emigrate to the USA, I'd sell up and buy one of those in a heartbeat !!
DON'T STEAL , THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T LIKE COMPETITION !!!
Lister A
Onan W3S Genny
Petter A1
Villiers C45 industrial
Continental flat six powerpacket
ANOTHER Lister 6/1 CS SOM , temporarily !!!

SHIPCHIEF

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #59 on: January 15, 2009, 07:25:55 PM »
Nice try Cognos;
If you have it, show it.
-40 in Chicago. In Fact, the whole of North America is cold.
2 years in a row record cold and snow.
Polar Ice pack = 1979 level. It came back with a vengance.
Solar output reaches scheduled low output, but does not recover as anticipated. (Russian solar scientists predicted it however)
Why does global warming modeling presume that some 'set value' is correct? Cyclic fluctuations are normal in everything. Global climate stasis is wrong on the face of it. Of course it rose for a while, Earth has been recovering from an Mini Ice Age for the last 250 years. Who has the authority to 'set' the correct value?
Natural corbon and Sulfer dioxide emmissions fron volcanic activity far surpasses human output, it's not even debatable.
All I'm saying: Adapt. We cannot Control it.
Be prepared to spend your 'adapting money' on a phony global warming tax that has no actual correcting action.
Be prepared to read how the money is spent in the general fund due to the financial emergency etc.
The exact same thing happened to the Tabacco lawsuit money. It dissapeared into the general fund and wasn't spent on Tobacco victims & education.
Ashwamegh 25/2 & ST12
Lister SR2 10Kw 'Long Edurance' genset on a 10 gallon sump/skid,
Onan 6.5NH in an old Jeager Compressor trailer and a few CCK's