Messing with Mother Nature
by Jeffrey JenaIn the spirit of full disclosure I am a global warming/climate change denier. I’m not even sure what the term “climate change” means. The climate is changing all the time. Most of us out here in Flyover Land call it “the weather.”
I have often posed the follow question to my global warming alarmist friends. Let’s just say for a minute that you are right and that the slight increase in the average temperature worldwide is caused by man and not a natural variation as seen throughout geological time. Why is this bad? What is the optimal temperature for the survival of the planet? What is the optimal temperature for human civilization to thrive? I live in the Midwest, does Florida have the copyright on good weather? If it heats up just a few degrees I could be wearing shorts and playing golf at Christmas.
Hotter weather would mean longer growing seasons in the upper Great Plains and southern Canada. Greenland didn’t get its name because the early Vikings were color blind, it was green. When I say green I mean green with foliage not “green’ as in taking a stupid canvas bag to the grocery store that won’t give you a plastic bag for your food but will be glad to sell you as many as you want. They’re back in aisle four between the Styrofoam cups and plastic knives and forks.
So, today I am reading my local paper and see an article where the President’s science advisor, John Holdren, has an idea about getting the temperature back down. He says we should shoot a bunch of dirt into the upper atmosphere. I don’t want anyone to get the wrong idea, I am not anti-science. I like science. But I like my science to have been field tested and verified by the scientific method. These guys who want to start shooting crap into the upper atmosphere are the same guys who wanted to spread coal dust and other dark material over the polar icecaps a few years back because they thought the Earth was getting to cold. The same enviro-maniacs who demanded we go out and buy a bunch of “green” light bulbs that turned out to be loaded with mercury.
These are the same kind of folks who don’t want us to eat foods made safer with irradiation and won’t eat a genetic engineered tomato. Geo-engineered weather is not like an ill-considered economic policy, you can’t go back and correct your mistake or hope inflation and future growth will rescue you. I am reminded of the Strother Martin line from Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid, “Morons, I am surrounded by morons!”
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
171 Comments
Climate change is histerical, but not very funny or real. Not real in the sense of CO2 as the bad guy.
Again, another crisis to be exploited by Team Butthead.
Is it time for a new POTUS yet?
Yes, the same type of folk who don't want nuclear power plants, the only real choice for green power.
And I'm going to shamelessly steal this to impress my friends, 'The climate is changing all the time. Most of us out here in Flyover Land call it “the weather”'.
A new twist on an old saying, "If you don't like the Earth's weather, wait a few hours, Obama will CHANGE it."
Whenever I hear about climate change, and how we need to stop it, I respond by asking, "If the climate is changing to adapt to changing conditions on Earth, shouldn't we just let it do its thing?"
They give me the same vapid look that the guys who dump foreign fish into ponds to heal a "problem" give me when I ask them what the possible repercussions of their actions might be.
First of all "Global Warming" is not about the planet heating up, it's about decreasing the prosperity of the American middle class which is a poke in the eye to nations who do not have the same living standards. The "warming" part of it was used because the planet was heating up (due to solar activity) the past decade (as was Mars which, so far as I know, has little man-made activity). Now it's "Climate Change". Of course the climate changes. It's called SEASONAL ACTIVITY! Prior to "Climate Change" the Watermelons (Green on the outside, pink or red inside) were howling about a new Ice Age. We also had a threat of "Nuclear Winter" and a "Population Bomb". All had one thing in common. AMERICAN PROSPERITY was a problem.
When someone can tell me what MAN did to melt the ice that covered Kentucky, then I might listen to their 'man-made' climate change hoopla.
It is just another way for the liberals to make us 'do as they say not as they do' and line their pockets with carbon credit payments and TAXES!
If you're on a conspiracy bent, how 'bout this one. A cabol of globalist came up with an idea that would shift power to Lichtenstein. They picked something so subjective and impossible to refute, and started hammering the message. First in the ivy halls, these pontificators of nonsense started buying their own BS, and it grew and grew. Now they've got what they want. The US's insatiable crave for more energy is stimied – no nukes, no refineries, and yet they are the first to power up their computers and complain about our irresponsible state of affairs. Either that or George Soros wants his picture on the ten dollar bill, but it's Lichenstein people, they want to rule the world!
Arghhh! Mr. Jena, you miss the point badly. Climate change is a political issue. It has very little to do with the veracity of the science either for or against. People need to understand that the ideology of the left is entirely contrived for political purposes. Democratic politicians are not asking themselves "what can we do to save the planet?" They are entirely absorbed with the question "how can I benefit from this politically?" America is facing a takeover by socialist oligarchs. If they succeed, we face a permanent loss of our liberties.
I think he watched too many superspy movies as a kid. Now he's using our tax money to buy himself a weather machine.
Tree huggers drive me up the wall. In the 70's, we were headed for a new ice age. Then we had to panic over global warming. Now, it's climate change. Can't they be a little consistent in their idiocy?
Global warming/freezing/warming/freezing is a fraud — pure and simple. The earth heats and cools. Fact. We've been a huge snowball in space, we've been a big old dry rock. A few thousand years ago (seconds in Earth time), ice covered most of North America and Europe. It's wasn't cave-fired industrial output that caused that ice to melt, and it's not modern industrial output that is causing the earth to warm… er cool. The key fact in all of this, is that the "greenhouse gases" that we produce, account for 3% of total greenhouse gases — the rest come from active volcanoes and rotting foliage.
It really pis…s me off that these socialist bastards are not only making in-roads in destroying our economy under this stupid theory, but they're also (1) keeping us from considering more serious threats — like antibiotics in the water or DNA damaging chemicals, (2) causing food prices to be inflated because of the ethanol boondoggle, (3) keeping us from gaining energy independence because they oppose drilling, and (4) giving conservation itself a bad name.
There is one consistency in their thinking — stop capitalism.
Hockey stick graph.
Not only did we call global climate change 'weather' in the way back time, but global warming was called 'summer' and global cooling was known as 'winter'. Yeah, I know – silly us.
I'm not one for conspiracies but the global warming issue is a de facto conspiracy. NBC "Green Week" is a great way to get the heat off of GE for polluting, it wins them favor with Democrat politicians because it plants their message in the minds of viewers. Global warming will soon be used as a way for companies to downsize using the excuse "we closed that plant because it didn't meet environmental standards." Global warming and the environment are also often used by people from let's say the electricity industry to stop competition from let's say coal by funding so called greenhouse gas legislation that legislates the destruction of their competitor (this has been documented). Also "green" politicians make money from corporate donors who need their "stamp of approval" for their next polluting project. Your vote as a politician is much more expensive if there's a reason it needs to be bought.
http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/usgs/
What I find particularly nettlesom is that Mr Holdren is a manifestation of B-Ball Barry's vast powers of executive judgment and wisdom. If one checks the above website, one will find that nature is spewing tons of dirt into the upper atmosphere. I appreciate 'brainstorming' as much as the next guy but some ideas are never meant to see the light of day.
Having said all that, the worst part of this de facto conspiracy is like other posters have pointed out it gives Democrats a way to promote their agenda to control every facet of our lives. I posted the above because this global warming craze is dangerous if you're a pro-free enterprise conservative or an anti-corporate liberal.
CFLs are not "loaded with mercury." They have less mercury than the fluorescent bulbs which are probably over your head right now, yet you don't bitch and moan about those. Why don't you admit that the only reason you are against them is because someone else supports their use? You are simply reactionary, childish, and ignorant. I am embarrassed for you.
You guys were also the "ozone deniers" that were against banning CFCs. In 20 years we were able to successfully stop and stabilize the spreading ozone depletion over the southern hemisphere, despite idiots like you fighting to continue production of the harmful chemicals.
Now of course you move on to your next battle against the evil scientists. You claim "I’m not even sure what the term “climate change” means", yet you just know it's not true? How? Have you read any of the 436,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers on the subject? No, you take pride in ignorance. You are like a school child who thinks it's not cool to be smart. You think book learnin' is for the "elite" and they are out to get you. The anti-intellectual sentiment on the right is strong and runs parallel to the nationalist, fascist fervor that you stir up to get the uneducated behind you. This is why you will always lose the vote among the college educated, and as we improve education in our country, you will continue to lose by wider margins. The future is bleak for your archaic ideology
Look at the troll write, write troll write.
blah blah blah same old ignorant talking points
For the last century or so, leftists have been obsessed with mass murder (think Eugenics, "The Population Bomb", abortion, euthanasia, Hitler, Stalin, The Killing Fields of Cambodia, etc).
What better way to legitimize their desire for mass murder than to declare that the very breath we exhale is a toxic pollutant.
Carbon Credit/Climate Change Scam = Al Gore's Consolation Prize for losing in 2000.
Find someone who' s still squawking about that election (there's millions of them) and you'll find they're also the most fanatical, mindless green weenies around. Facts don't matter to them. They're so emotionally attached to "Everything Al" that they simply can't admit that they've chosen unwisely. Like many battered women (and 'Metrosexual Bromantics'), they're going to stand by their man, no matter what, because they 'love' him. Naturally, Al knows this and milks it to the max.
His 'wives' aren't going to call the
real scientistspolice. And even if thereal scientistspolice showed up — maybe because the neighbors called — they'll distract or even fight thereal scientistspolice for him while he makes his getaway out the back. I honestly don't think I've ever seen someone so slimy. This is just my slant on it. Sorry to get all "ranty" on Easter. Maybe I should go hug a bunny, or something.I’m not ready to hop on board any black helicopters, (unless I can man the gunners seat), or swear on my kids heads that Area 51 is hiding space critters, but it still makes one pause and ponder the questions surrounding the “why’s” and “wherefores” of the great climate hoax.
Either way I don’t think this ☞ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynUacAgNPiQ&fe...
can be a very good solution to it all, and indeed in the end, might just start a irreversible cascading effect that would be most unpleasant for all of us.
“Trust the science and the scientists.” Ya, just about as much as I trust congress to clean up their messes with our money.
Not Over.
Hey antefascist, why don't you go find some facts to back up your diatribe? Links idiot, links.
Hey antefascist, why don't you go find some facts to back up your diatribe? Links idiot, links.
Bravo.
http://www.alistz.net
Bravo.
http://www.alistz.net
And yet we can give 436,001 papers saying this is a bunch of hogwash. Al Gore needed to make money and he's wheeling into the bank. Besides, weren''t you the crop of geniuses that banned DDT, that would have clearly saved millions in sub continental Africa? The track record aint so good.
I was there during the 1970's, and all though few people seem to recall it, the leftist propaganda of that day was less about a coming Ice Age, but was consistently about massive worldwide starvation. There was a consistent stream of magazine articles and weekly newspaper stories that all reported with complete certainty that scientists had determined, that by this current decade, the populations of China and India would be so large that it would be impossible for the world to produce enough food.
http://www.AlistZ.net
In my lifetime, the liberal media has fanned the flames of hysteria with Cold War Apocalypse ('60s), New Ice Age Apocalypse ('70s), the Overpopulation Apocalypse ('80s, still simmering), Y2K Apocalypse (late '90s), Meteor Strike Apocalypse (early 2000), and now Global Warming Apocalypse with a bonus feature 'Economic Armageddon and The End of Capitalism'. The liberal media – fear mongering at its finest.
In 20 years we were able to successfully stop and stabilize the spreading ozone depletion over the southern hemisphere
Since the Ozone hole shrinks when ice melts, how do you know that global warming isn't the cause of the 'stabalization' of the ozone hole?
http://www.AlistZ.net
Have you read any of the 436,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers on the subject?
Have you? If so, could you cite one scientist, if asked the question: "Given the geological history of the earth, do you believe there will be another Ice age?" who would answer, 'No"?
http://www.AlistZ.net
Have you read any of the 436,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers on the subject?
I feel lucky to have a person with so much knowledge on board! I do know that all global warming theory is based upon computer modeling. Could you cite the name of one climate model that is predicitve in nature? That is, if we load in the data from ..say… 1930 to 1960 it can spit out the temperature for the 1970's?
http://www.AlistZ.net
ECO-hypocrisy and lunacy? I don't know what you're talking about.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/64e6aed6e1/eco-c...
I do think that global warming is a real problem (in fact, the biggest problem facing us right now), but I'll agree that shooting dirt into the atmosphere may be a real bad idea. Something like that could have real repercussions.
I guess you will stick to OMG THEY HAVE NUKES BOMB THE BROWN PEOPLE!!!1!1
"436,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers…"
Name 5.
I'll just wait for you over here at my kitchen table eating my chocolate bunny till you deliver.
"This is why you will always lose the vote among the college educated, and as we improve education in our country…"
It should read as follows: "As the left improves their indoctrination of the young, empty minded "eco-nazis" by the elite 1968 hippy losers turned collage professors"
Not Over.
"Have you read any of the 436,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers on the subject?"
No I haven't. But I do find it very strangely delightful that the number of these papers happens to be a perfectly rounded number like 436,000. It's almost as if you just made up that number for your response. And judging from your wording, I'm led to believe that ALL 436,000 agree that global warming IS and that it is caused by MAN.
Hmmm, would this classify as one of those Man-Caused Disasters that Sec. Napolitano referred to in her testimony?
And once again, the pigs enable this swill.
It should read as follows: "As the left improves their indoctrination of the young, empty minded "eco-nazis" by the elite 1968 hippy losers turned collage professors"
Exactly right. It took me a few years to shake off the liberal haze left by my college professors. It takes an independent thinker to be willing to look beyond what you're spoon fed in college. Unfortunately not enough people are willing (or able) to do that.
I'm going to be my simpleton self by saying something simple: I hate those damned bulbs. They're ugly. They throw ugly light. They look ridiculous in any of my light fixtures. I hate that moment of anticipation wondering if the damn thing is actually going to come on. And when it's time to shuffle off this mortal coil, I'm going to break one open and take a big drink of mercury. Give me tungsten, or give me death!
I was ready to make the same point.
From my first year in school, I was in fear of man ending the world until I started noticing that not a single one of their predictions had come true (I think I started wising up about 6th or 7th grade). By the time I reached adulthood, my contempt for these lemming fear mongers could not have gone lower.
I shouldn't be surprised, but what amazes me about the whole climate change issue is how mainstreamed and accepted it's become. Maybe it's more overt here in California, but the issue isn't even debated here, it's considered an accepted fact. Don't bother arguing the point, it's a done deal as far as this state is concerned. I see stuff on TV everyday that refers to climate change and how we can contribute to whatever "solution" they're peddling. Every time I go to the grocery store I'm one of the few who doesn't bring in my own "green" bags. The libraries are selling them now too. If you try to say you don't believe in man-made climate change and think the "cap and trade" system is b.s. people look at you like you're crazy.
Now my theory is a little more dire than the Stalinist mass murderers. I am talking about the Terminator and Matrix end of days story line. Didn't scientists scorch the sky so the machines would not get there energy from the Sun? Do you think that the scientists that got that idea wrong were also "pinkies from Columbia and Harvard"? Good thing that their science fiction only messes up the planet in Hollywood.
See even dumb ideas like the one posted above cannot effect the planet at all, because there mind is bigger than there actual ability. They are career educators never able to use there talents to fulfill their ideas and theories. They are just men like all of us, and it is people that cannot humble themselves to the magnitude of the planet and the true powerlessness of man in relation to the planet, that have these ideas that we can change the climate for good or worse.
The problem is that there fear mongering and sci-fi theories do effect other aspects of our lives. No more DDT brought more malaria, "green" light bulbs are filled with mercury, the in ability to drill for new water is killing California and strict unreal pollution standards make the lives of the poor and middle class harder to live.
But those career politicians and educators have no need for concern because they are rich and have never had to actually use there actual abilities or test their theories on themselves or there friends, and it is there "compassion" and "theories" that are really "cruel and unusual".
And forty years ago the scientists told us that the ozone layer was getting so thick from automobile emissions pollution that we had to delete certain additives from gasoline while adding others. It worked. The ozone layer thinned (at least in the northern hemisphere). Then came the scientists who told us how horrible it was that the ozone layer had thinned, a hole had been punched in it, and now we were all going to die of skin cancer. I can only draw one of two conclusions from this. Either the scientists have their heads up their wazoos, or air pollution is good for us.
Or maybe there's a third alternative. The scientists could do their work scientifically, without an agenda and without a given result which they must justify by juggling facts and statistics. And maybe they could factor in the natural causes which have always been by far the major cause of any climate change and quit coming up with the solution that everything would be just fine if all human beings would simply disappear from the face of the earth.
I simply break and dispose of the mercury filled CFL's along with the 4 foot, 2 foot and the U- shaped fluorescent bulbs in the garbage. It's hundreds every week because I'm the facilities manager for a building in downtown L.A.
I can dispose of them improperly because I calculated I earned some self-serving carbon credits by using them in the first place.
Gore isn't the only guy who can use the carbon credit scam to his advantage.
Liberals always like to accuse conservatives of wanting to use harmful chemicals and ruin the earth. Conservatives have no objection to new technology that WORKS JUST AS WELL OR BETTER THAN THE CURRENT TECHNOLOGY. Your little electric cars are just sweet I'm sure, but they only work for someone who lives in town. Hybrids handle horribly on ice and snow. Nuclear power is a good, clean alternative to coal, but they don't want that. We use the current design of cars because they work. Same with electricity and all the other technology. If your "green alternative" doesn't work as well, I'm not going to waste my money on it.
It is easy to correlate sun activity with the temperature on Earth, but government funded 'studies' will continue to promote global warming hysteria because it puts butter on their bread. The problem with most of these alarmist 'fads' is they look at one variable to explain the result, even if that variable is minor or one of hundreds of variables. The biggest greenhouse gas out there is water….and liberal oral output.
Wow, that's it, that's your snappy little comeback?
Moulitsas is probably gonna have to revoke your troll badge for that lameness.
Wow, that's it, that's your snappy little comeback?
Moulitsas is probably gonna have to revoke your troll badge for that lameness.
The agenda-driven scientists use a method called postdiction. They choose a result, and then tweak all the prior factors to prove the result is correct. Your 1930 to 1960 question is answered by "yes, if we load in the "RIGHT" data. They've been doing it for years in "scientific political polls." They predict the outcome of an election. They get it wrong. But were they really wrong, you ask? Not according to them. They turn to postdiction. They go back to their data, find where somebody "entered the wrong data," then they enter the "right data," come up with the real result, and claim they would have been right all along if someone hadn't screwed up the data.
Ground level ozone (smog) is a respiratory hazard caused by pollution and is totally different from stratospheric ozone, which prevents life from being destroyed by UV radiation. You are what Lenin called a "useful idiot." You know nothing about the issue but the right uses morons like you to staunchly defend pollution and raping of the ecosystem.
Anybody who denies climate change should read this article about Australia.
Even if you are in the camp that says climate change has nothing to do with mankind you cannot deny that there is a serious climate change going on in Australia. Worth a read.
Sorry, I figured that a real example of mass-murder by you and your ilk would be enough.
Thank you for sharing. Good bye.
Has anyone heard of any environmental impact studies done on the effect that windmill farms may have on climate. All of my computer models predict that they will cause massive droughts and worldwide famine. But since the Government hasn't paid me a billion dollars to make that study, I guess it doesn't count for much.
I was driving through Boston today, the wind was barely blowing, and I saw a wind generator outside of the IBEW union hall and the rotor was turning fast. I guess I was supposed to believe it was making electricity instead of using it.
You guys forgot the Peak Oil Apocalypse (1975-present), which is the only conspiracy theory I've ever heard conservatives buy into — albeit conservatives of the Buchanan/Paul/Rockwell stripe.
Climate change happens. Climate changed has happened since the beginning of the earth. Climate change will happen until the end of the earth.
What will they use dirt guns ?
anti:
(part 1) Calm down. I use CFLs — many of us (who think AGW is a scam) do because utility bills have steered us to them. But most of us WERE NOT using flourescent tubes before this; we were using incandescents. We weren't using Hg-carrying bulbs. The sudden shift in "Green" definition, especially by a largely uninformed and sycophantic press, is the point here.
(part 2)
As for CFCs, yes, many of us opposed the ban. I still do for some fire suppression applications where their safety and effectiveness is unparalleled and in some refrigeration applications. Actual correlation between atmospheric CFC concentrations and size and location of ozone gaps is weak; if you have better data please do reference it and I'll readily admit error. Also many of the replacements are not as friendly to users or system materials.
(part 3)
Finally, it's true: we DON'T know what "climate change" means in current context. Does it mean warming when temperature trends don't match projections of AGW enthusiasts? Does it mean fewer hurricanes (now that megastorms-due-to-AGW theories are bust)? Is resultant record-low hurricane activity of the past 18-24 months bad or good, and is it bad only if you can connect it to anthropogenic causes? There are MANY peer-reviewed scientific theories on the subject (ex-Veep Gore's presentation which included "increasing rates of global catastrophe" was not among them by the way), and I have read at least dozens of them. Read those of the late 90's/early 00's and recognize how many are now quite clearly incorrect; then consider how meaningless "436,000" is.
The future is bleak only if we politically suppress science. As long as you and I can have these discussions openly without repercussions from official authority, we'll be fine.
"You guys were also the 'ozone deniers' that were against banning CFCs. In 20 years we were able to successfully stop and stabilize the spreading ozone depletion over the southern hemisphere, despite idiots like you fighting to continue production of the harmful chemicals."
Thank you for the excellent example of how this con works.
Identify a naturally occurring phenomenon. Claim it is caused by some undesired behavior. Ban that behavior. Wait 20 years. When naturally occurring phenomenon changes, congratulate self for "fixing" it.
Whether it is slaughtering goats, sacrificing virgins, or changing light bulbs, this con has been going on since the beginning of man. The fact that you claim "science" supports you when the entire Climate Change hysteria completely ignores the scientific method is an especially nice touch.
As you probably don't know, here are the steps of the scientific method:
1. Ask a Question
2. Do Background Research
3. Construct a Hypothesis
4. Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
5. Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
6. Communicate Your Results
The "Global Warming scientists" seem to have skipped stepped 4 and gone straight to step 5. Sorry, but you can't claim that as science.
Oh man, I totally forgot about the Y2K apocalypse. As a software engineer, that one was so obviously over-blown. Despite that, the media and con men kept talking it up so they could sell you stuff.
My dad got suckered into one of those Y2K-preparation conferences. He actually went and stocked the house with flashlights, toilet paper and water. When the big day came, I was actually hoping for some chaos. Alas, all that I heard was the sound of conman laughing about all the money they made.
Of course, they too would tell you that there was no disaster because "they" warned everyone in time.
Also don't forget the SARS/Bird Flu apocalypses of the early 2000s.
I have no problem saying that the climate is changing. That's what climates do. A simple study of geology will reveal that.
Most importantly, climates changed in serious and drastic ways long before man existed.
I'm with you, if they mandate them as the One and Only Bulb, I'm going to redo my entire house to use gaslight. Why? Because they were cool, and would probably PO a hippie. I call it a double win.
Don't forget. There won't be any guns. Just dirt.
Climate has always changed, and always will. There has been no stable period of climate during the Holocene, our own climatic era, which began with the end of the last ice age 12,000 years ago. During the Holocene there have been numerous sub-periods with dramatically varied climate, such as the warm Holocene Optimum (7,000 B.C. to 3,000 B.C., during which humanity began to flourish, and advance technologically), the warm Roman Optimum (200 B.C. to 400 A.D., a time of abundant crops that promoted the empire), the cold Dark Ages (400 A.D. to 900 A.D., during which the Nile River froze, major cities were abandoned, the Roman Empire fell apart, and pestilence and famine were widespread), the Medieval Warm Period (900 A.D. to 1300 A.D., during which agriculture flourished, wealth increased, and dozens of lavish examples of Gothic architecture were created), the Little Ice Age (1300 to 1850, during much of which plague, crop failures, witch burnings, food riots — and even revolutions, including the French Revolution — were the rule of thumb), followed by our own time of relative warmth (1850 to present, during which population has increased, technology and medical advances have been astonishing, and agriculture has flourished).
I like the idea of tossing the dead ones onto the lawns of my local democratic Congressman.
Anti__Let me explain something to you, and I will use very small words so I am sure you know all of them__When I say I don't know what "climate change" means I am not being serious. I am a comedian, what we do is use satire, sarcasm and irony to point out the stupid and ridiculous. I am not sure if you know this but there are guys like me who espouse a liberal viewpoint. You might watch or read them and finally be able to grasp the concept.__Even though I grew up in eastern KY I did get me some book learning and have a couple of them thar degrees from colleges. Hey, I have even teached at one of them thar colleges.( See, that use of bad grammar was an example of sarcasm aimed at you due to your elitist attitude about the common man)__Now, a few questions for you. Can you define the word "fascist' without looking in a dictionary? Can you site any scientific study that says a lessening of the use of CFC's is solely responsible for the shinking of the "ozone hole"? Which has more Mercury, a traditional bulb or and Al Gore Special? Have you ever had a girlfriend who knew you were there?__
Interestingly, the only apocalypse that I think we should be worried about — the possibility that an asteroid could hit the planet and take us out, is the one the liberals don't seem to care about. Maybe because that would require us to move forward in technology and to protect ourselves? Hmmm.
The thing is Jeffery liberals can't grasp the concepts of sarcasm, satire and/or irony. Irony especially, most of them think it's like goldie but just made out of iron instead of gold. We've seen it before, and Top Men have validated the theory many times, far in excess of 436,000 statements made by them have shown this gap in "getting it." So I'm sorry to say, it's pretty much a lost cause.
And yeah the last sentence in your reply did make me do the proverbial LOL too.
"Have you ever had a girlfriend who knew you were there?" — Jeff, that's an AWESOME line!!
Plus, it pretty much sums up how I see this troll.
But don't forget, there's a gummint plan for everything. Gaslight requires gas. Gas causes the greenhouse effect (just ask the cows). We'll be dead in a week if the gummint doesn't stop it. So first they'll regulate it, then discover it's a natural resource that America could profit from thereby killing any plan to use it, then they'll ban all production and refining unless we buy it from a foreign enemy, and then they'll tax its use at 600% of base value. And then we can all read our books on recycled paper by the light of the silvery moon while humming kumbaya. I love it when a plan comes together!
Dear Mod
If the polar ice is melting why is Key West still above water? Dust bowl in Australia? Humm good thing nothing like that never happened in the US! Oh wait it did, seventy years ago! I'm glad Al gore straighted that out. Too bad OK and NE urned ito a giant wasteland.
So, cutting to the chase (no pun intended), we will soon be heating our homes by burning methane gas from Indian cows?
Hippies not dead bulbs right? Because broken glass would be really bad in the summer for children and small animals, but if you meant the other ones, yeah I'm with you.
Aww come on! I bought my pipe and deerstalker hat and everything. I had a plan!
Don't give them too many ideas Andrew, next they'll say that the Iranian and North Korean nuclear and missile programs are all just part of an multi-lateral drive for developing nations to be able to help with the Big Rock when it comes…
The biggest problem facing us? Looked at the stock market, Indian ocean shipping lanes, Iranian nuclear program, North Korean rocket program, national debt, military readiness, rising tide of Islamist tendencies in both the Middle East and Europe, Russian expansionism, unemployment figures, or energy reserves lately? And those are just for starters.
I'm sorry but "global warming" is far from the biggest problem facing us right now, in fact it's so low on the real problems totem pole that the only thing that immediately springs to mind as being less of a problem is the flair shortage at TGI Fridays due to the Chinese jacking the price of bling up. Seriously, buy a t-shirt and some shorts and start looking at the bigger picture here.
I wouldn't worry about that, they hate nuclear weapons. In fact, if we were building a nuke to move an asteroid out of the way, I suspect they would be screaming about the harm we were about to do.
While you're at it, newsjunkie, ask what MAN did to melt the polar ice caps on Mars.
Sure, I can answer your questions one at a time.
1) Fascism started under Mussolini in Italy and it is generally thought to have characteristics such as authoritarian nationalism, corporatism, social darwinism, and a sense of perpetual conflict between nations and races. Most historians place fascism on the far right of the political spectrum. However, since it has been used as a pejorative term, many people advocating right-wing government have tried to redefine it.
2) The scientific study about the ozone layer that you are looking for would be the one published by Paul Newman et. al. of NASA Goddard Space Center.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/world_a...
3) As I stated, a traditional fluorescent bulb contains more mercury than a CFL.
4) I have many female callers that may or may not know where I am at any given time.
Not unless the cows agree. They're sacred, you know.
I don't think you and Andrew are taking this whole thing seriously. I'm going to have to consult with Auntie Fascist.
I don't know what's funnier, your posting or your username.
Kudos!
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/climate_averages/de...
I read the article that you recommended and I found this site. This site allows you to see the maximum average temps for any area in Australia. You can see in a color coded map the temps over 10-year to 30-year averages. You can also choose time periods starting in the earl 1900's. It easy to use and you can compare times and averages, and see if the temperature has gone up or down and when.
Don't believe any article that quote a "leading weather prophet", Australia is always thought of as an apocalyptic waist land, Haven't you ever seen the Mad Max series?
If global warming is real, the consequences vastly outweigh those of your examples, even combined. The extinction of animal species, catastrophic natural disasters, health risks, etc, etc. Of course, I hope that you are right and that global warming is nothing but a myth. But if the fear-mongerers and liberals are right, it is no doubt the biggest problem facing us.
The consequences would outweigh any of those, even if combined? Even if Global Warming alarmists are correct (and there's no proof they are) it wouldn't mean the end of the world as we know it anytime soon. A nuclear exchange within the next couple of years, that would. The economy completely crashing worldwide tomorrow, that would. There are many more clear and present dangers, with immediate mass death results out there than whatever could happen, if global warming is real, in a few decades or centuries.
It's like worrying that since you left the iron plugged in that your house could burn down if you leave, while looking down the barrel of a loaded and cocked gun being pointed at you by a burglar. While there are all manner of dangers that could happen in the long run, if you're about to be shot in the face in the next 10 seconds they're all rather moot.
Ahh but see their hate for nuclear weapons are only the ones possessed by Western democracies, when a Third World despot wants nuclear weapons they're just trying to "level the playing field" which is proper in their minds.
I'm taking it very seriously, I mean I'm even going to have to cancel my violin lessons now too!
And gaseous.
Please no, I'll be good. She scares me. She might say something rude. Oh no!!
Sadly true.
Maybe she'll make us some pie though. Aunts do that right?
The Russians had the same idea years ago, but never implemented it. It's far fetched. I can see Barack Obama doing it because he thinks he's God.
What? Aren't you familiar with the exhaust pipe we've run between us and Mars?
Next time she shows up, we should ask.
No don't ask that, we really don't want to know what their answer would be.
I'm betting though their answer would have something to do with time traveling Mayan astronaut Templars…
Auntie Fascist, do you know how to make pie?
The climate changes all the time! It's called the 4 Seasons: Spring, Summer, Fall, & Winter.
The Left does its lexicon mambo dance; first it's Global Cooling (from the 1970's-1980's), Global Warming (1990-2000's) & now Climate Change. Eventually, I see them going back to Global Cooling & talk about the next Ice Age. Everything under the sun seems to cause Global Warming from frog farts to sweet tea. It's ridiculous!
The evironmental movement are masquerading as such to hide their Communist nature; all of these government plans chips away at our freedoms.
Hey nutso's, if you want to cure Global Warming/Cooling./Climate Change, you need to talk to the Sun. Better yet, fly into sun. We won't miss you.
"female callers"? How old are you — 70? That's really pathetic gramps that you're spending your last few days trolling BH.
I remember being scared of an Ice Age as a kid in the late 1970's then scared again of a Nuclear Winter in the early 1980's; after this, I just stopped taking these hysterical "journalist" reports seriously. When a reporter runs around like Chicken Little, I know not to believe him or her. I look at them with contempt.
So what brown people have we bombed because they have nukes?
And if we have, I take it you have no problem with nuclear proliferation?
At any rate, "my ilk" aren't responsible for the deaths of almost 150 million people in the last century (unlike those of YOUR ilk)
Thing is, even if every one of the ideas the green movement spouts off about worked and we reversed the so-called Global Warming (lets pretend that a real thing), ULTIMATELY we'd end up with a dirtier world because as you destroy the worlds economies, people in those economies will be less and less interested in "being green" and more interest in just staying alive.
Its RICH PEOPLE that put the environment ahead of their own interests, not poor people. If you make more rich people you'll have more environmentally aware people "doing good", you make more poor people and you'll have more people eating species to extinction, burning wood and fossil fuels for heat and cooking (and doing so less cleanly) and using old, less efficient technologies because they can't afford the latest whiz-bang-green gadgets.
Like every problem humanity has ever faced, the best solution is ALWAYS more liberty and more capitalism.
Thanks for hitting the global warming scam.
The hair on fire proponents of strict c02 controls suffer from the same myopic malady that afflicts most extremists, they think that it's possible to change just one thing. Even if humans had the power to significantly reduce c02, and even if that act had a discernible effect on global warming,
at what cost would that come? As the DDT/malaria debacle clearly showed – the law of unintended consequences must not be ignored.
I'm no scientist, but a good friend is. As a quick backgrounder, he's a toe-tag liberal. In fact I have no doubt that he'd rather gnaw off his toes, and not stop there, than ever vote for a Republican. But above being a partisan he is a scientist. As an USGS geologist recently stationed in Anchorage he's forged ground breaking agreements with Russia and others regarding the exploration and use of northern natural resources. He's studied Global Warming seriously, from a strict scientific position, and he states that science simply does not validate the hype.
Some of the common 'sky is falling' predictions drum in that humans are responsible for the rising sea levels. Really? Here's a note he recently sent after receiving a preliminary report the USGS commissioned…
—-
I just closed out this investigation (I designed and administered the contract) on determining the
age of terrestrial landforms we have documented with seismic data in the Beaufort Sea (under 60
meters of water and some sediment). We have to invoke prehistoric archaeological safeguards if the
features are younger than 13,000 years. We found that these drowned and buried river channels,
islands, and peat bogs, are less than probably 10,000 years old. So we have to continue to
safeguard them from disturbance. The other very interesting and maybe surprising angle on this is
the sea level history.
Here’s what my contract authors discovered about past sea levels.
“The results of this study in the context of regional correlations generally point to the following
Holocene paleo-sea levels and rates of sea level rise for the Alaskan Beaufort Sea shelf: (1) at the
beginning of the Holocene, about 11,000 years ago, sea level was at or below about 50 m below modern
sea level (bsl), (2) after 10,500 years B.P., sea level had risen to at least 50 m bsl and flooded
the Bering Strait, (3) between 9,000 and 7,500 years B.P., sea level rose rapidly from about 44 m
bsl to 18/16 m bsl, a rate of about 1.8 cm/yr., (4) sea level was about 12 m bsl by 6,000 years B.P.
and reached near modern levels (within 2 m bsl) by 5,000 years B.P., and (5) the rates of sea level
rise between 7,500 and 4,500 years B.P., at 0.3 to 0.6 cm/yr, were more than ten times the present
rate of 0.3 mm/yr.”
So, when the Old Kingdom Egyptians were working on massive projects and trading in the
Mediterranean, sea level was rising 10 X faster than today. And when people were well established
in Alaska and had already established cultures in S. America, sea level was rising 600 times faster
than today!
No wonder there are flood creation myths in almost all cultures on Earth!
Natural cycles can be quite variable."
—————————–
600x faster than today!
One of the points he likes to make is that even if the majority of scientists back the GW hype, that doesn’t mean much. Most scientists are expert in a fairly tight area, and few specialize in the science of studying and deciphering the history of our world, like he, as a geologist, is.
Please don't get me wrong, I consider myself an environmentally responsible citizen. But that doesn't mean I like the taste of Kool-Aid .
Edit-
Looks like the entire report is now avail for DL here: http://www.mms.gov/alaska/reports/2007rpts/2007_0...
I don't know which ozone study you were looking for. I said forty years ago. and automobile emissions pollutants. Your study refers to the later discovery of the effects of fluorocarbons and delivery systems for chemical sprays. And I know that irony apparently escapes you, but nobody here is arguing in favor of air pollution. And since you are incapable of writing civilly, I don't care how many more of your favorite studies you link to, anything worthwhile you have to say is drowned out in your invective, so I will ignore them and you.
Blithering idiot liberals and their colossal guilt complex, if they weren’t miserable they wouldn’t be breathing. Soon Cap-n-Trade will hit, raising energy cost by 40%, hey you stupid liberals that’s a tax increase that will hit every family and business in America, I predict it will go over like a fart in a spacesuit, and hasten the liberal demise. These leftist fools are blowing their wad, all in. Keep watching and waiting and soon we’ll spank these bastards and send them to their rooms permanently. Remember all you business owners when Cap-n-trade hits, and other tax increases, and you need to consolidate, “fire your liberals first.”
Shoot the Klingon wife into space. Don't they know how to take care of things in the atmosphere?
[...] Martin line from Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid,
Andrew: I know what you mean. I've had to change my shorts twice today.
Andrew: I know what you mean. I've had to change my shorts twice today.
arnold turned on the machine in total recall. that is why the ice melted.
in the words of the guy from mythbusters……"i reject your reality, and substitute my own"
oh, isn't that the slogan for all the global warming weenies?
some of us just stock up on the good old incandescents, currently i have 3 cases of 60w, and 3 cases of 100w. when i go to the local building supply place for stuff for my next project and i have a few extra coins i pick up a case of each. no one will tell me what kind of light i will have in my house.
Actually I am part of the generation that are the future leaders of America. Electing Obama was only the beginning. I'm not a troll. The comment system is called "Intense Debate." If you can't take the heat, go to redstate.org.
Are you the same person who threatened to kill John Stewart? LOL
Auntie Fascist,
You did not answer Andrew's question. DO YOU MAKE PIE? And if you really were the new example of the coming generation, everyone would have already slit their wrists. Fortunately, plenty of us know, or have kids who aren't as stupid as you, so we know there will be normal people to balance you loons out, same as now. I personally like the CFL bulbs, been buying them before I ever really heard a thing about them. They don't throw the breakers in my house when overloaded. Otherwise, I couldn't give a rip less.
1GDaddy,
I read your resignation letter from HA last nite. I agree with you, used to be a really good site, but they won't ditch the trolls, and they topix get ridiculous, along with the infighting. A lot of people have left the site, one reason they are not picky upon enrollment, nor do the ban frequently enough. Plus, Allah leads to many Palin, Chrisitan, Conservative threads that end up as bashings.
Thanks for the good link. Lot of good info there.
I guess I am of a different mind, If it's going to happen anyway, then I will not worry about any of it. I assume that the world will not end in my lifetime, (if it does, oh well), so whatever happens in the future, I will leave to those supposedly brilliant people. Like Auntie Fascist.
It's GWB's weather control machine he has in Crawford…Why won't anyone listen to me???
"Actually I am part of the generation that are the future leaders of America."
“Gott sie dank du bist heir meine leibe son. Das National Socialist Parti brauks diene helfe yets.”
Sorry, my German is a little rusty, I learned it back in the 70's and 80's while living for those ten years in Europistan.
Believe me when I say, I've met thousands of you over zealous “future leaders” and you have always thought you where right. Even as your new "master" had you dragged off screaming, "BUT…BUT I HELPED YOU WIN, I DID ALL THAT YOU ASKED OF ME!"
Fool. Dolt. Sad, sad starry eyed Utopian.
“Youth is wasted on the young.”
Not Over.
You all don't know me, I'm a real smart guy a Mensa member, it's a Hungarian-Jewish thing don't ask.
Man Made Global Warmiing? Absolute Nonsense and Junk Science.
Geez, I wanted to write "can't be very good" not "can".
Note to self: Wear your glasses when typing.
Not Over.
Andrew: He did. And proved my point about him being incapable of understanding irony. I guess he thinks I'm really going to kill Jon Stewart. For him, that would be like my cutting off his left arm. He wants us to go over to RedState if we can't handle his attacks. We're so weak, don't you know? I think it's time we all just thumbed him down and move on. We're wasting our time and energy trying to deal with a crude lowlife. And every time we react to his ravings, he's happy as a contaminated clam. Now I have to go and pray for forgiveness for threatening to kill Dear Jon.
Golani: Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
I see that. No humor, no irony, no brains. AND she didn't even answer my question. How down right rude!
So, should we leave? I have to admit, I kind of like it here — fascist trolls not withstanding.
You noticed that too huh? How rude that she won't answer my question! Between you and me, this reeks of bad breeding.
In other words you're a college kid who thinks he's a genius because your professors pat you on the top of the head when you parrot their inane rhetoric back at them. Okay gotcha.
In other words you're a college kid who thinks he's a genius because your professors pat you on the top of the head when you parrot their inane rhetoric back at them. Okay gotcha.
1. Of course you're a troll. You're just not a good one.
2. You know nothing about heat or intense debate or even debate. Give me a break! I've caused more chaos on this board by accident than you've cause with all of your little kiddie brain cells running all out. You're a sad little girl, Auntie.
Now answer my f…cking question!
I'm not taking anything else she says seriously until I find out what the story is on the pie.
Probably a very good thing, artistically speaking.
So instead I'm just going to go back to my original plan of forming the greatest punk rock band ever: Angry Fudge.
No no leaving, we just need to get some damn pie.
I don't give much thought to it either Butler.
But actually if the world really does have to end I hope it does happen in my lifetime. Why you may ask? Because if I have to to die, I figure everyone else should too at the same time. That way people won't be obsessing over whether or not I'm wearing pants in the coffin, asking the funeral director what shade of rouge he used because my aunt liked it and wanted to pick some up, inquiring whether there's any bacon in the potato salad at my wake. etc. It's really for the best.
Clearly, you are a master debater
Andrew…buddy…I think you just made it wet it's pants! I swear. HAHAHAHA!
"You're a bad man…a very bad man…OFF to the corn field with you mister."
Geez, the trolls here are truly lame. I guess the DNC is too busy paying off ACORN to invest in the new breed, top of the notch troll infiltrators.
Man I like being around grown ups.
Not Over.
Anti
If you were in my class, and hey you might be here is how I would score your test
1)Your Fascism answer is palgerized from Wiki . Academic probation!
2)You link to Nasa does not answer the question posed, It gives no evidence that the up swing in ozone is man made and not a natural cycle. Grade F
3)I don't use traditional fluorescent bulbs in my home. You argument is flawed and therefore irrelevant
4) You present no evidence of your claim… the jury is still out
Result: You are sent back to community college!
I think they no longer teach these spoiled children the difference between liberty and license. When you call them on it, they respond with "I'm not rude, you motherf—er" without it ever occurring to them that they've just proven your point. In one sentence alone he managed to call me a useful idiot, a moron and a rapist. But he's incensed because I'm going to kill Jon Stewart. There's just no point in reponding to these guys at all, they only see it as an opening for another vitriol-laced personal attack. No sense of proportion, no sense of decorum, no sense of humor.
You're kidding, right? The rising water levels are for at least 50 years from now and don't actually take into account ice melting.
Check out this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEXtrLKru-Y
And the automobile emissions.
GoodDaddy, I concur — that sounds like wet pants to me.
I don't know why they can't get better trolls. Or why our's don't want to step up their game. It's like arguing with a four year old. What fun is that?
Also, did you notice, she still won't answer my question?
That's almost clever: 3.6 / 10. Right back at you, only without the "de".
So, should we assume that you don't know how to make pie?
Pie? There's pie involved? I hope it's cherry, the filling color-coordinates the swastika really well, don'tcha know…
Me neither. No pie, no piece. . .
Oh, they're useless for debate alright. Even if they weren't ill mannered little jerk offs, they still don't know enough to make them worth debating. Take little Auntie Fascist, for example, all she knows comes from the Wikipedia. There's not much you can do with someone like that.
You haven't lived until, as a cashier, you have been handed a "green bag" covered with pet hair and the odor of pet urine!!!
harrumph
Shhhhh. No one is supposed to know about that.
Wet pants and weak tea go together.
Now where's our pie?
Hey, Golani: Too bad. I was picturing Angry Fudge at the height of your success, and some happy wannabe future rock star furiously playing air violin to the sound of your greatest hits.
Jeffrey,
It’s like you’re bringing a “mini gun” to a “pillow fight,” with armed friends on your flanks.
Now this is how we “uppity conservatives” SHOULD fight back from the liberal zombie apocalypse.
1). Look your advisory in the eye.
2). Never blink.
3). Laugh in their faces, and immediately “call” them out on their sh!t.
4). Keep your hands OUT OF YOUR POCKETS and loosely at your sides.
5). Never submit.
Not Over.
Or better yet, the post grad program at Joe's College of beauty and dentistry. The tinfoil on the head program is doing wonders in curing the incredibly deranged, or so I'm told.
Well I dunno Growl tiger ……
We did send a bunch of probes to mars. They made small holes in the planet and the electric batteries may be leaking.
I am sure that Al Gore and Michael Moore will have a documentary answering that concern of yours too.
To Auntie Fascist and any other Troll that knows more about science than me. Please read this and answer my question ….
Well I have attempted to read the science for GW/CC and found three studies. (Antarctic Ice Cores, Greenland Ice Cores, and the Study of Pores in leaves). None of these experiments agree. In a scientific circle consensus is not agreed to by voting but by varied and separate experiments showing similar results.
The Greenland Cores are said to be contaminated by Calcium Carbonate which effects the CO2 dissolved in the ice. The leaves are said to be too subject to seasonal variations to be reliable although in my opinion that does not explain why a regression analysis would not show a graph line similar to the Antarctic Cores. (this will be many parts)
The Antarctic Cores are thought to be the most reliable because of Antarctica’s distance from man made activities. My question is about this study.
The coldest recorded temperature on Antarctica is -127 degrees F or -88 degrees Celsius. It also routinely (at least once a year) gets colder than -78 degrees F. By the way the proper protocol for discussing temperatures in the South Pole by Polies (people that live there) is to drop the negative which I am not doing here.
This temperature is significant because Auntie Fascist it is the temperature in normal atmosphere that CO2 condenses to a solid. CO2 is also denser than H2O. It is 44 g/mole as opposed to 18g/mole. H2O also is unique among liquids in that the crystalline structure when it turns to a solid makes it expand and thus it is less dense than in liquid form. Hence the reason it floats on water. (the next post will be last I promise)
Please explain to me in detail the following. In the South Pole where it not only freezes below -78 degrees Celsius but has 100 mile an hour winds as well. At time that the dry ice (CO2) will fall and sink lower than the water ice. When the temperature warms above -78 degrees C and the dry ice sublimates and travels toward the surface, how does this not affect the amount of CO2 that will be found dissolved in the upper layers of the Antarctic Ice Cores. After all according to your hockey stick study it is only the last 50 years that show the change even though we burned more coal in the 19th century. I have yet to find anyone that discusses or answers this question. Since you know everything there is to know on this subject maybe you can finally enlighten us all.
(3rd part)
I always love how you guys throw out terms like "100 of the top climatologists" or "1000 of the top scientists" and now it's "436,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers"…. PLEASE! You are probably lucky to actually have read one of those papers. Climate Change believers love to throw out the same old political based IPCC clap trap. The reality is that there are many more scientists who are skeptics of climate change than there are believers.
So "antifascist" you appear to be a walking oxymoron. How is it you are an "antifascist" but yet you appear to support Obama, who is proving to be one of the most fascist Presidents of the United States?
Fascism isn't Right Wing. The Nazi Party was the National Socialist Party. Progressives in the 1920's were very supportive of Fascism and greatly admired Mussolini.
For the love of all that's holy, never use that name if you will ever play in Kalifornia or NYC. And for whatever respect you hold for the 2nd Amendment, no matter what songs or "message" you have, never ever have T-shirts and/or posters proclaiming "Angry Fudge: Are you packing?"
… working at the behest of the Vatican…
"3) As I stated, a traditional fluorescent bulb contains more mercury than a CFL. "
Is that taking into account how much larger a traditional 40 watt (nominal) 4 foot bulb is than a CFL? On either a per watt consumed or a per lumen emitted basis, which has more Hg? Upon disposal, are the extra toxic products contained in the circuitry of a CFL being considered? Standard fluorescent bulbs are recyclable, businesses are often required to collect their used ones. Are you aware of the available low-Hg fluorescent tubes, denoted by a green end cap, that are considered so low that businesses may dispose of them in bulk?
Are you even aware that it's well possible that ordinary people will not see any cost savings from CFL's due to the higher purchasing costs vs energy saved, plus the real world lifespans are running short of the advertised ones requiring more frequent purchasing than in those "savings" estimates?
If you have already been sold on how great CFL's are with the meager and incomplete data that's been fed you, without considering or even knowing to consider all the other factors involved, that does not speak well of your understanding of the truth of the whole environmental "climate change" debate.
Oh, number 4? I had heard they existed, but I never knew anyone who actually worked at one of those 900 numbers for women. Good to know you have a job!
speaking of nuclear winter, i have the solution for two major problems: we detonate every nuke on the planet thus bringing on nuclear winter. Voila! no more nuclear weapons and no more global warming. (there may be some negative side effects, but this IS A CRISIS, DAMMIT!!!!)
…but secretly selling their secrets to the Old Man in the Mountain. Pesky double agents….
Quick thought. The "dirt" method will be like a volcano erupting, and disperse particulates in the upper atmosphere. The effect will lead to Global Dimming, making sunlight less direct and more diffuse. Which will hurt all the solar energy technologies that use bright direct sunlight. Thus while we are to head to these solar technologies to avoid global warming, they're planning a remediation strategy that will reduce their already limited effectiveness.
Just a thought.
Quick thought. The "dirt" method will be like a volcano erupting, and disperse particulates in the upper atmosphere. The effect will lead to Global Dimming, making sunlight less direct and more diffuse. Which will hurt all the solar energy technologies that use bright direct sunlight. Thus while we are to head to these solar technologies to avoid global warming, they're planning a remediation strategy that will reduce their already limited effectiveness.
Just a thought.
My favorite counter to this one is they there was an oil deposit in the Gulf of Mexico off the Louisiana coast that they thought they emptied out… they went back and did another survey only to find out that the oil deposit had "refilled"
The whole ozone thing baffles me. Do you know what ozone is and how it is made? Ozone (O3) is a highly unstable compound that is formed when energy is added to O2 (the stable form) creating two O molecules which are highly unstable. These then react with O2 to form ozone. Where does one suppose the energy comes from to generate the O3? It is from the sun. At what time of the year does the “hole” in the ozone grow? During the winter when Antarctica gets less sun. When does the “hole” shrink? During the summer when Antarctica gets more sun to provide the energy to create the ozone. So could the changes in ozone concentration in the stratosphere possibly be caused by changes in the weather?
In addition, how exactly did all those CFC molecules that were destroying the ozone layer get all the way to the stratosphere? They are all heavier than air and in my experience molecules with heavier molecular weights collect in low areas rather than high ones. In addition, most of the world (China, India, South America) continues to use the non-patented CFC refrigerants that are the supposed culprits of ozone depletion. So how the “hole” has mysteriously been repaired is a mystery to me. But I do know that the new patented refrigerants have made some companies a ton of money. Will the hole re-appear when those patents expire?
I laughed out loud, the people at work are now staring at me.
that is creative thinking, Well done.
You must be logged in to post a comment.