72
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
old europe
 
  3  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 03:25 pm
@spendius,
A solution for what exactly, spendius?
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 03:51 pm
@old europe,
Quote:
I know that's what you're thinking. I've acknowledged that. I just think that

misrepresenting the facts about global warming misrepresenting the benefits of renewables


Call me weird.


Okay you're weird. Smile

I see them as two entirely separate subjects related only when renewables are recommended as a way to combat global warming. I can think of at least several other reasons to be in favor of renewables that have absolutely nothing to do with global warming and several ways to look at global warming that have absolutely nothing to do with renewables.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  4  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 04:20 pm
I believe the discussion above should lead us to a few basic conclusions;
1. The motives behind the actions of other people, whether they are T. Boone Pickens; or "AGW religionists"; or merely very nice politically correct folks who recycle and avidly support whatever might be the currently popular view; or even executives of oil companies are all basically unknowable and uninteresting. We can guess about what they might be, and that guess might add some sauce to whatever opinion we might hold about the likely effects of their actions, however, beyond that there is little benefit in worrying about what makes them tick.
2. It is what they do or propose to do and its likely effects on us that really matters. If some greedy entrepreneur wants to peddle wind turbines or wind generated electrical power, and does so at a competitive price, then he is helping reduce our balance of payments and reduce airborne pollution, no matter what might be his motives. Similarly if some high-minded environmental zealot arranges to get government mandates or subsidies for the use of his ever-so-green product, then he is stealing from the public treasury, no matter how piously he rationalizes his actions. An oil company executive who arranges for a permit for offshore drilling is helping reduce our balance of payments problem, no matter what may motivate him. However he is not reducing airborne pollution, no matter what else he might say.
Cycloptichorn
 
  5  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 04:23 pm
@georgeob1,
Are those who advocate war, and who stand to profit from it, stealing from the public treasury? Rolling Eyes

C'mon, it's all in the point of view. Our government is going to spend funds on something, people disagree what that something should be, but that doesn't make them thieves.

Cycloptichorn
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 04:28 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Those who misrepresent ANYTHING in order to benefit from the public treasury are stealing from the public treasury. Value is not received for money given.

People can do much good with the worst of motives and can do much harm with the best of motives.

George's point is that it is not the motive per se that determines the outcome.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 04:34 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I don't think your analogy holds water. However if you were to extend the idea beyond just making money to power and all its attributes, then I do believe you might have a case. Woodrow Wilson got us into a useless war that served none of our national interests and indeed sowed the seeds for continuous conflict throughout the century. It appears that his motive was enhanced personal power and fulfillment in some psychological sense, and, more to the point, he got it - for a while. However he did a great deal of harm in the process, and that - the outcome of it all - is the basis of the historical judgement on his failure as a political leader.

High Seas
 
  2  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 04:49 pm
@georgeob1,
http://www.aip.org/mgr/png/images/ice500nm.gif
http://www.aip.org/png/2008/303.htm

If I may introduce a magical digression, pic is H2O crossing on a slow temperature way down through 4 degrees Celsius (water) with atmosphere remaining at room temperature.

Magic, and a lot of humility - and gratitude. Tks to all here, particularly G oB for educating the rest of us.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 05:01 pm
@old europe,
oe wrote-

Quote:
A solution for what exactly, spendius?


I've no idea mate. If there is no solution htf do you expect me to know what it is?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 05:13 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cyclo wrote-

Quote:
Are those who advocate war, and who stand to profit from it, stealing from the public treasury?


Not really. They are so good that they can "steal from the public treasury" under any conditions. As they hate war just as much as you do, it keeping them awake at night, it is reasonable to assume they judge it necessary. And if they are not good enough to judge what are you doing electing them?

Have you seen Sarkozy's Mrs and he's had to fly to somewhere for a few days. I can't see him being in favour of war.

They would much rather read fairy stories to junior classes with the cameras running than go to war. I feel pretty sure of that. It gets kinky otherwise.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 05:21 pm
@High Seas,
High Seas wrote-

Quote:
If I may introduce a magical digression, pic is H2O crossing on a slow temperature way down through 4 degrees Celsius (water) with atmosphere remaining at room temperature.


You want Yellow Pages love. Plumbing and Heating Engineers.
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 05:26 pm
@spendius,
Ask them do they practice sexual discrimation and if they deny it put the phone down.
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 05:26 pm
@spendius,
Gently.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 06:02 pm
@old europe,
old europe asked spendius:
A solution for what exactly, spendius?
My Answer: a solution to a problem that does not exist!

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb

As of December 20, 2007, over 400 prominent scientists--not a minority of those scientists who have published their views on global warming--from more than two dozen countries have voiced significant objections to major aspects of the alleged UN IPCC "consensus" on man-made global warming.


THE DISSENTS OF THE SCIENTIFIC DISSENTERS

Quote:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report

205
Emeritus Professor Lance Endersbee, a former dean of engineering and pro-vice chancellor at Monash University, accused the scientific leaders of trying to stifle debate over the causes of climate change. (LINK) According to a April 5, 2007 article in the Sydney Morning Herald, Professor Endersbee says it is highly probable that increased electromagnetic radiation of the sun is behind global warming. "There are several disturbing aspects of the IPCC report which indicate that the conclusions are based on serious misconceptions about the behavior of the Earth," Prof Endersbee said. "The report reflects little understanding of the dynamic relation between the Earth, the Sun and the Cosmos. In these circumstances it is incredible that some leaders of scientific societies and academies have tried to use their authority to demand acceptance of the IPCC report," Endersbee added. In a follow-up interview on July 6, 2007 on Australia's ABC Western Queensland's Morning Program, Endersbee explained the earth is an electrical conductor moving through the magnetic flux of the sun. "So we have these electric currents being created within the earth in response to the electro-magnetic radiation of the sun and that is the main driver of climate change on earth - it's not man," he explained. Endersbee believes that the world has been warming naturally due to this increased magnetic flow from the sun that started around the year 1700. "And now we're starting to depict that it seems to be reaching an end of that cycle and it does seem as though the earth may be cooling down," he said. Endersbee also said carbon trading schemes were being set up by governments for political reasons, not scientific reasons. "What terrifies me is the way the state governments in Australia [with] their emissions trading are contemplating using the superannuation funds to invest in carbon trading - they're going to lose their money!" He further explained, "Scholarship is being driven by media and media attention and this is a terrifying state of affairs. You can get all the money in the world if the research you're doing is related to climate change... if you say climate change isn't caused by man it's caused by the sun, it doesn't get any money at all."

IF there is no human caused climate change,
THEN climate change cannot be a reason for humans to adopt alternate means for generating energy that do not affect climate.

But what about human caused polution?

IF humans are controlling the emission of pollutants to a tolerable level, THEN there is no reason for humans to adopt alternate means for generating energy that do not cause pollution to an intolerable level.

Check with China. They have much work to do to control their pollution to an acceptable level.

Check with the USA. They are controlling their pollution to an acceptable level.

spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 06:05 pm
@ican711nm,
So there's nothing to worry about?

That's a relief. As you were.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  4  
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 08:55 pm
I notice the usual suspects didn't post the July hadcrut3 and GISS temperature anomalies.

Perhaps because the temperature is on the increase?
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 08:08 am
@parados,
I don't see increases from the last few years, Parados. I admit I thought it would continue lower than it apparently has, and to be honest, I wonder about the figures, as my personal observation reveals a cooler year. Sure, I am not all over the world, but even the official temps still show only about a half degree C warmer than the averages for the past 100 years. I think we need to wait until the end of the year to see how it shapes up.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 08:52 am
@parados,
Is the sky falling in again?
parados
 
  3  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 09:24 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Is the sky falling in again?

Never said it was. You never did explain to okie and ican about regressions in charting trends. You might want to try it some time if you are really interested in making sure we stick to the truth here.
georgeob1
 
  3  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 02:34 pm
@parados,
Well, I didn't follow those details of the arguments, mostly because they seemed to me to be a lot of sound and fury over very little. I could have been wrong in that judgement, and if you wish to point out an issue to me I will followup on it.

My impression is that okie readily acknowledges the concensus view of some warming in the past century. I'm also aware of the anomolous trends in the data, prominently including the cooling that occurred in the 1950s thru early 1970s, possibly a result of the then fast-increasing SOX emissions. They are, as you know reflective in the atmosphere, reducing solar warming. We reduced these concentrations rapidly in the 1980s with new restrictions on auto and factory emissions. Given all the many factors involved, ranging from solar to earth orbital, other constituents in the atmosphers, and the not fully measurable effects of CO2 removal by green plants and the oceans, and other variables as well, I don't see much benefit in arguing about small and local variations - even if these arguments are supported by linear regression approximations. None of these issues really sheds any light on the exaggerated claims of accelerating warming, and none of it is effective in silencing the doctrinaire types on both sides of this contentious issue.
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 04:18 pm
@georgeob1,

Hi George, I lost some details when the PM facility disappeared.

Can you please contact me or Tak by e-mail? I'll put my address on my Profile, which you can access by clicking on the name.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 09/21/2021 at 08:05:53