So global warming is climate change?

[CUSP82 Administrator Admin of the Month Dec 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close CUSP82]

Well our trusted government released a study a couple of week ago on this very topic. It seems they say that 97% of climate scientist agree on global warming, or is it climate change. 97%? Gee you can't get 97% of any group to agree on anything but the government says those smart scientist did. Somehow I don't believe them.


Now who were these scientist? Nobody knows cause they ain't giving out names, just the 97% number. Now the biggest source for funding IN THE WORLD is the U.S. government. Do you think the government would dole out money for research against their view? Not likely.

So now if it rains, snows, gets hot, or whatever it is all do to climate change or global warming or whatever. They have answers for it all. In 2013 NASA released a study that shows that most of the planets in our solar system tend to be warming, they are going through their own climate change. Hell even Pluto, which may or may not be a planet, is warming up. Last I looked there are no cars on Mars, Pluto has no factories, and hell Jupiter is just too cloudy to see anything. Those planets that are warming have no real interaction with man so why is it that our climate change is due to humans and theirs' isn't? Simple they have no people there so it must be something else but since we have people ours must be from people. Logical huh?

So who wants to explain to me why it's our fault here on Earth and who's to blame for the change on Mars where they have no people, only Martians.

Now the U.S. has about 6% of the worlds population and accounts for just under 10% of the carbon in the atmosphere. China, which opens a new coal fired plant every week with none of the emission controls we have produces 50 times more, yes 50 times more not percent, of carbon into the air. We don't have cost efficient alternative energy here yet in this country. It's coming but it will take more time. Why do we have to put some much regulation and controls on our factories which makes things more expensive and cost thousands of jobs if we're the only ones doing it? Why weaken our economy, put people out of work, when the rest of the world could care less. Us cleaning up our act means nothing while those countries pollute. Yes we will find cleaner energy as time goes by but why do we have to be in such a rush and radically change things at the expense of people and jobs here. Do you think it has anything to do with many politicians like Al Gore who are heavily invested in "clean energy" that they want to make a profit under the guise of keeping the planet safe for our grandchildren which is what they all say? I really wonder!

[watersnake Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close watersnake]

The ice is melting at the poles. fast. So what you have happening is this ice cold water streaming of glaciers into the ocean. This could cause major permanent coastal flooding and maybe an ice age. However i am not too worried about the situation like i used to be. For i jelq, so i am a jelqist.

[FalconFire Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close FalconFire]

Here's a very simple experiment that should help.

Take two large glass enclosures and put them both under the same wattage of light. Introduce more carbon dioxide into one of the systems and measure both with a heat probe.

The results are that the carbon dioxide system warms much more rapidly, because it traps more of the radiant energy from escaping as carrier electrons (also known as photons).

Since we can measure the exact mixture of our atmosphere, and trends related to carbon dioxide, we know that the rates are increasing exponentially. And since we know carbon dioxide traps more radiant energy, we know it will cause warming.

Well our trusted government released a study a couple of week ago on this very topic. It seems they say that 97% of climate scientist agree on global warming, or is it climate change. 97%? Gee you can't get 97% of any group to agree on anything but the government says those smart scientist did. Somehow I don't believe them.


Now who were these scientist? Nobody knows cause they ain't giving out names, just the 97% number. Now the biggest source for funding IN THE WORLD is the U.S. government. Do you think the government would dole out money for research against their view? Not likely.

So now if it rains, snows, gets hot, or whatever it is all do to climate change or global warming or whatever. They have answers for it all. In 2013 NASA released a study that shows that most of the planets in our solar system tend to be warming, they are going through their own climate change. Hell even Pluto, which may or may not be a planet, is warming up. Last I looked there are no cars on Mars, Pluto has no factories, and hell Jupiter is just too cloudy to see anything. Those planets that are warming have no real interaction with man so why is it that our climate change is due to humans and theirs' isn't? Simple they have no people there so it must be something else but since we have people ours must be from people. Logical huh?

So who wants to explain to me why it's our fault here on Earth and who's to blame for the change on Mars where they have no people, only Martians.

Now the U.S. has about 6% of the worlds population and accounts for just under 10% of the carbon in the atmosphere. China, which opens a new coal fired plant every week with none of the emission controls we have produces 50 times more, yes 50 times more not percent, of carbon into the air. We don't have cost efficient alternative energy here yet in this country. It's coming but it will take more time. Why do we have to put some much regulation and controls on our factories which makes things more expensive and cost thousands of jobs if we're the only ones doing it? Why weaken our economy, put people out of work, when the rest of the world could care less. Us cleaning up our act means nothing while those countries pollute. Yes we will find cleaner energy as time goes by but why do we have to be in such a rush and radically change things at the expense of people and jobs here. Do you think it has anything to do with many politicians like Al Gore who are heavily invested in "clean energy" that they want to make a profit under the guise of keeping the planet safe for our grandchildren which is what they all say? I really wonder!

[Rasputine Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Rasputine]

I know that someone is getting uber rich off of global warming
and it is not me,seem that I am paying more and getting less!

Who really represents the concerns of the common man anyways?
Sorry for the rant

[President G Member Find all posts View Profile Close President G]

Ok, I do not want my experience here to be ruined by a political debate and I usually try to avoid them at all costs, but I feel the need to answer some of your questions.

1st of all, yes, climate change is a much more accurate term than global warming, because the atmospheric changes being measured affect both extremes in heat and extremes in cold. It makes it much easier to accept/visualize as well.

2nd, I have heard of no such study by NASA but I will look into it later when I have more time. Likely the reasons both are changing are all very different, seeing as - how you pointed out - the conditions on all planets vary so greatly. For example, Pluto which is on the furthest reaches of our solar system as an extremely long, as well as elliptical orbit. That means that Pluto goes around the sun much more slowly than Earth, and also that it gets much closer at certain points in its orbit than normal, causing the surface exposed to increase in heat. Not to mention that Pluto has virtually no atmosphere, and thus comparing a literal change in temperature on Pluto (or any other planet) with Earth would be fallacy.

3rd, it is a crying shame that China pollutes at the rate it does. As you pointed out, the produce radically more amounts of CO2 than we do. In a way you answered your own question: did you not consider that the regulations on factories in the United States prevent us from polluting at the rate of China? Did you know that people in the industrious cities like Shanghai have to wear medical masks when outdoors so they can breath properly? Also note that there are 400,000,000 people in the US vs. 2,000,000,000 in China. No one is saying that China shouldn't clean up their act. In fact, most people are actually saying they should. However, them not cleaning up their regulations on industry doesn't change how much we pollute, let alone whether or not it is the responsible thing to do.

4th, regulations do not cost jobs or make costs go through the roof. That is fallacy as well. In fact, if companies take energy savings initiatives, such as high efficiency lighting systems, their bills actually tend to go down. Fancy that! Additionally, I'm pretty sure that if new industries develop providing alternative energy sources that that would create jobs and bolster the economy?

5th, if you want to talk about money power and politics, I'll let you in on a little secret: oil companies are THE most powerful entity in the United States, and possibly throughout the world. Look at how much we drive in the US. Look how many things are fueled by gasoline, diesel fuel, and oil. You think that clean energy companies and Al Gore are teaming up and out to get people? Yeah, go ahead and look up how much Exxon Mobil made last year. Tell me the last time you saw a solar powered car drive by.

So when it comes down to it, there are a few things to take away from this. 1, climate change is not a myth. It is terrifying to believe that, questionable when you don't see people taking action, and frustrating when many other countries in the world don't seem to be doing anything about it (i.e. China). However, that leads to the 2nd thing to take away: if you want to blame someone, blame the oil companies. If ANYONE has a grip on the government, it is them. They make more money than most other industries in the world, and they're rich beyond your wildest dreams. Doesn't it make sense that they would like to misinform people about clean energy, because it's going to hurt their wallets if someone does come along with a great idea that is affordable that will truly lead to change?

So if you don't want to accept that climate change is a well documented, well observed, well studied phenomenon that is your choice. But just know these things, and know that denying it won't make it better or go away. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at big oil.

If I didn't address any of your points, please let me know, it's hard to keep track of my ideas after writing for a while!

[kickinthemebs Senior Member Member of the Month Feb 2014 Find all posts View Profile Close kickinthemebs]

Must... not... get into conversation with climate change denier....

[CUSP82 Administrator Admin of the Month Dec 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close CUSP82]

No Mr President this is not meant to be political but informative for discussion. I do that when I get bored. Maybe later when I have time I'll address some of your other issues but I want to address one.

I have a small business that has been regulated to death and it continues to be so. Some of these regulations are pure foolishness. If I did not have to spend the time and money to comply with things that affect really no one I could hire a person or two more. I even have to fill out forms, 10 pages each which does take time, quarterly to affirm that I don't use certain materials, materials I have never ever used and will never use. The time it takes me to do not just this form but others makes costs go up as my time, like yours, is worth something, but it has prevented me from hiring at least 2 people and I am small. Now if we're talking about a company with 500 employees and under much greater regulation how many people may have gotten jobs? No one knows !

[namsokiek Banned Find all posts View Profile Close namsokiek]

They physical phenomenon is global warming. This is easily verified if someone wants to bother to gather the data from the thousands of weather stations and sea temperature records. OK, not extremely easy but definitely easier than changing your spark-plugs. The phenomenal thing about this is the rate of the change in temperature. It is true the cyclical warming and cooling of our planet puts us into a warming trend. However, the rate of the warming is something that has not been seen in recorded history. We're not talking 1.2 times or even 2 times the rate of change, we're talking about a rate of change 10 times the rates of any warming in recorded history. The largest single thing that is different between this warming trend and all of the others is the combustion of fossil fuels and the omnipresence of the byproduct.

The symptom of global warming is climate change. Extreme weather conditions (hotter summers, colder winters) more turbulent weather, lower capability to predict seasonal weather. Although the recording system for natural disasters are shorter than the temperature record, there is also a steep increasing trend of the occurrence (tornadoes, floods, hurricanes, droughts [not earthquakes or tsunamis]). Another side effect is the increased rate of glacial melting. A phenomena recorded in several places Photos show rapid retreat of Chile glacier ? USATODAY.com. The result is a rising of sea level and when combined with the increased CO2 absorption, a change in water chemistry. I admit, rising seawater doesn't bother me much. So what if NYC will be covered by the ocean. Since NYC is entirely peopled by rude and abrasive people, that's 8M fewer jerks on the planet.

However, the chemical change of the oceans is something to worry about. If it kills off the organisms at the bottom of the food chain, the whole food chain will go.

There are, at least, two aspects where the whole climate-change, dooms-day proselytizers go wrong. First is the "predictive" models, second is what economists call destructive technologies, and third is why do I care.

The models, most unfortunately, are able to re-create the past weather very adequately. However, there is no guarantee or evidence that it predicts weather patterns with any degree of accuracy. You see, years ago they created these models and ran the predictions. Each year they "improve" the model by adding variables that account for weather patterns that were not predicted during the last year. However, no one has gone back and compared the predictions of 10 years ago with the actual results. There is no accountability for the accuracy of their predictions. Which is a pretty poor practice for something that people suggest that we spend trillions of dollars to avoid the predictions.

The second flaw with the models are that they have yet to model the impact that clouds have on the climate. Clouds can either block heat from reaching the surface of the earth or blanket heat from escaping the earth. However, cloud actions are so computationally complex that they are not part of the models. Hence a MAJOR flaw in the models.

Destructive technologies is a technology that destroys an entire group of goods by making it extinct. The most perfect example is the PC. The PC, or more accurately MS Word, completely destroyed the use of typewriters and a typing pool. TOTALLY EXTINCT. Another example of destructive technology occurred around the turn of the 1900's. New York was plagued with an impending environmental disaster. There were so many horse buggies in NYC the problem of dealing with all of the horse manure became a city wide crisis. It was estimated by the highest authorities that many hundreds of thousands of dollars (equivalent to our millions) would be required to deal with the problem. However, in less than one decade, the problem was completely gone and none of the manure handling proposals were used to do it. The solution to the problem was the horse-less carriage, or more accurately, Henry Ford creating the assembly line to make cars cheap enough that normal people could by them.

There are many ideas out there to deal with CO2 accumulation or other technologies but we won't know which one will kill the CO2 problem until it jumps out of the mind of a brilliant person.

Finally, why do I care? These calamitous warnings are going to come to fruition in 100 years. I'll be dead. I know there are folks who are worried about leaving their kids with this enormous financial burden, but why. It is shown that every generation has been more wealthy than the previous. In two generations, these folks will have more money than us. Why should I spend trillions of dollars to help wealthier people avoid a financial cost? I'm not going to experience these negative economic problems, why do I need to solve them?

If we do nothing, the folks experiencing the economic hardship will have the incentive to change them, through changes in lifestyle or creating of destructive technologies. They will be smarter (because every generation is also more educated than the previous), they will be richer, and they stand to benefit from their efforts. We are not as smart, we are not as wealthy, and we have very little to gain by avoiding an uncertain calamity predicted to occur in 100 years.

[CUSP82 Administrator Admin of the Month Dec 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close CUSP82]

The artic ice flow has increased by 60% from last year. Back in the 70's Time magazine told us all we were going into another ice age. So we were cold, then we got warm, now we're getting cold again. WTF?

There is no model that accurately predicts what the earth, and sun, and our other celestial friends have upon each other; each computer model was thought up by a human with something he wanted to prove. I hear them say their theory or model is definitive proof. Sorry but there is no such thing as definitive proof as that belies that all that could ever be known about a subject is known which in this case it is not.

Oh yes man does have an affect on the earth; how much? Well there is no definitive answer. What we know now will change in 5 years and change 5 years after that. The solutions we are rushing for more than likely will be the wrong solutions 10 years from now and how much damage will be caused by the wrong solutions. This is no longer science but rather a political game and therein lies the major part of the problem.

Man, and science, always improves with time. Why not allow that to happen? I am sure there are smart people working on the earths environment because they want to do it, they find it interesting, not to promote an agenda. Amputation worked well ( well not really too well) 100 years ago but it just doesn't seem to be trendy now. Why not let science learn instead of running around doing things in a rush because of agendas. Besides if we alone do it,and do it now at great cost, if the rest of the world doesn't follow that what we do, the sacrifices we make, mean nothing. At the same time we here in the good ole U.S.A if we allow this not too well thought out issue as of yet to ruin or decrease out economy, then who else steps in and do they care about the earth or just their pockets, as some countries in Asia seem to do. Interesting.

[AlpineNewt Senior Member Member of the Month Sept 2014 Find all posts View Profile Close AlpineNewt]

I blame the termites.

[CUSP82 Administrator Admin of the Month Dec 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close CUSP82]

Oh and just one more thing. The president on this thread mentioned that he did not want to get into a political debate. Exactly the issue. Politics should have nothing to do with it should it. One side has scientists that say this and the other side has scientists that say that. So science, which is supposed to seek truth, is now run by political parties. Do you really think that any side should be believed? And if neither side should be believed that what should we do?

[GoingForGold Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close GoingForGold]

We could always pay people less and hire more, but who doesn't want to be fat and happy?

It will cost much, much more to fix this problem in the future. Read a climate report by the IPCC. It's not "our" government. No one is making money, just trying to prevent an astronomical loss of money.

I know someone who owns a small business and has nothing to do with climate legislation. It affects whom it should affect. I'm sorry you feel wronged, maybe hire a secretary to fill out your annoying paperwork?

[BigRooster Senior Member Member of the Month Apr 2018PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close BigRooster]

It's a joke and a hoax. It's all about crony capitalism. And I agree Cusp. All these other countries could care less about saving the planet. But America who uses a small percentage compared to the rest is going to save the planet. Yeah Ok.
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
I think this is your climate change. I mean its called the four seasons. Of course the climate is going to change during certain times of the year.
There are certain people who are making a lot money off of a hoax.

[mcpecker Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close mcpecker]

Everyone seems to always forget about the sun. It's that big, bright thing in the sky. And it has cycles, too. In fact, it's in Solar Maximus now but it's one of the weakest on record.

SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids

snnn.jpg

And, yes, the other planets are also changing dramatically. Let me throw a stone and see if I can hit any evidence.

Super Storm on Saturn - NASA Science

Mars Odyssey: Newsroom

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says

Pluto is undergoing global warming, researchers find | MIT News Office

Global Warming on Pluto Puzzles Scientists | Space.com

Pluto thought to be warming up - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

MIT researcher finds evidence of global warming on Neptune's largest moon | MIT News Office

Global Warming Detected on Triton

Prediction of a global climate change on Jupiter : Abstract : Nature

New Storm on Jupiter Hints at Climate Change | Space.com

There are too many inconsistencies in the politicized scientific story, and too many variables missed to paint a true picture. But we keep marching to the beat drum. It's hard to find the truth. There's the concept called "The Big Lie".

"All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying."—Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

Agenda 21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[MrBigDick Retired ModeratorPEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close MrBigDick]

I think all of this climate change stuff may or may not be alot of bologna. What I do know is that when I see shows on the weather channel showing these violent tornadoes tearing through the mid west every summer and then I see footage from a deadly tornado outbreak in the early 1900's, it makes me wonder. I think everything is cyclical. JMO.