Re: Climategate
 

[quote=budw38;633933]Yes , because man stopped driving cars , started making " fake " snow = for skiing ... and Firstdown drank antifreeze before pi$$ing off his boat :) . In all seriousness , [B]I'am 100% in favor of cleaner water , air , just about anything we can use to our advantage as far as buying less oil from outside our borders [/B].[/quote]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]If I won the lottery I would get a Prius as my daily driver, not because I want to save the Earth, or fit in with my [URL="http://www.hybridcars.com/hybrid-drivers/profile-of-hybrid-drivers.html"]new rich friends [/URL], but because I want America independent on foreign oil. [/FONT][/COLOR]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Being wasteful and purposely polluting or littering is wrong, but forcing others to believe in something you do is wrong too. To tax the hell out of everyone based on their carbon output is ridiculous, when the tax comes from unproven and manipulated “facts”.[/FONT][/COLOR]

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmdub130;633944]scienist that beleive in global warming :)[/quote]
So much so they cook the numbers to prove their point.

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmpetert;633945]If I won the lottery I would get a Prius as my daily driver, [/quote]

i'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit on that one

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmpetert;633945][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]If I won the lottery I would get a Prius as my daily driver, not because I want to save the Earth, or fit in with my [URL="http://www.hybridcars.com/hybrid-drivers/profile-of-hybrid-drivers.html"]new rich friends [/URL], but because I want America independent on foreign oil. [/FONT][/COLOR]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Being wasteful and purposely polluting or littering is wrong, but forcing others to believe in something you do is wrong too. To tax the hell out of everyone based on their carbon output is ridiculous, when the tax comes from unproven and manipulated “facts”.[/FONT][/COLOR][/quote]

Just don't pull out infront of me in that Prius while I'm driving my gas sucking Full Size Yukon while pulling my 24 1/2 foot boat drinking beer and chunking the cans out the windows. Actually I don't know why anyone that does not need to drive around one of those full size SUV's do. I drove that Yukon to work for a week and burned over $100 in fuel and my other SUV I burn around $45 per week. The only reason I have it is I need the size and power to pull my boat but thats the only reason.

Re: Climategate
 

Victor Miguel Ponce is professor of civil and environmental engineering at San Diego State University. His specialty is hydrology, environmental science, and sustainable development.


The Earth was formed about 4,540,000,000 years ago.

In the beginning, the Earth's atmosphere contained very little oxygen (less than 1% oxygen pressure).

Early plants started to develop more than 2 billion years ago, probably about 2,700,000,000.

Through photosynthesis, plants uptake carbon dioxide into the biosphere as organic matter, and release oxygen as a byproduct.

Through geologic time, oxygen accumulated gradually in the atmosphere, reaching a value of about 21% of atmospheric gases at the present time.

Through geologic time, surplus organic matter has been sequestered in the lithosphere as fossil organic materials (coal, petroleum, and natural gas).

Early animals (the first organisms with external shells) started to develop around 600,000,000 years ago.

Animals operate in the opposite way than plants: they take up oxygen, burn organic matter (food), and release carbon dioxide as a byproduct.

Early humans (Australopithecus anamensis) began to develop about 4,100,000 years ago.

Cool climatic conditions have prevailed during the past 1,000,000 years. The species Homo sapiens evolved under these climatic conditions.

Homo sapiens dates back to more than 400,000 years.

Estimates for the variety Homo sapiens sapiens, to which all humans belong, range from 130,000 to 195,000 years old.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was as low as 190 ppm during the last Ice Age, about 21,000 years ago.

The last Ice Age began to recede about 20,000 years ago.

The agricultural revolution, where humans converted forests and rangelands into farms, began to develop about 10,000 years ago.

The agricultural revolution caused a reduction in standing biomass in the biosphere and reduced the uptake of carbon dioxide in midlatitudinal regions, indirectly contributing, however so slightly, to global warming.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased gradually from a low of 190 ppm 21,000 year ago, to about 290 ppm in the year 1900, i.e., at an average rate of 0.00478 ppm per year.

The industrial revolution, where humans developed machines (artificial animals, since they consume fuels, which are mostly organic matter), began in England about 240 years ago (1767).


In October 1999, the world's population reached 6,000,000,000, which is double that of the year 1959 (the doubling occurred in 40 years).


The world's population is currently increasing at the rate of about 80,000,000 per year (about 1.2 %).

The current world population is 6,781,000,000 (September 1, 2009).

The global fleet of motor vehicles is estimated at 830,000,000 (2006).


The global fleet of motor vehicles has been recently growing at the rate of 16,000,000 per year.

Motor vehicles (cars, trucks, buses, and scooters) account for 80% of all transport-related energy use.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which was at 290 ppm in the year 1900, rose to 316 ppm in 1959, or at an average 0.44 ppm per year.

Measurements of the concentration of carbon dioxide since 1959 (316 ppm) have revealed an increase to 387 ppm in 2009, or at an average 1.42 ppm per year.


The concentration of carbon dioxide has increased an average of about 1.8 ppm per year over the past two decades.

The concentration of carbon dioxide increased 2.87 ppm in 1997-98, more than in any other year of record.

The year 1998 was the warmest of record. The year 2002 was the second warmest (to that date). The year 2003 was the third warmest (to that date). The year 2004 was the fourth warmest (to that date). The year 2005 equaled 1998 as the warmest of record. The year 2007 equaled 1998 as the second warmest of record. The ten warmest years have occurred in the twelve-year period 1997-2008.

About 75% of the annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is due to the burning of fossil fuels.

The remaining 25% is attributed to anthropogenic changes in land use, which have the effect of reducing the net uptake of carbon dioxide.

Anthropogenic changes in land use occur when forests are converted to rangelands, rangelands to agriculture, and agriculture to urban areas.

Other patterns of land degradation--deforestation, overgrazing, overcultivation, desertification, and salinization--reduce the net uptake of carbon dioxide, indirectly contributing, however slightly, to global warming.

Re: Climategate
 

[FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]Here is a nice Truth - Myth column from John Stossel from a couple years ago. I remember being forced to watch 20/20 when i was a real little kid with my parents (back in the day when people only had 1 tv). The only part of the show i liked was when John Stossell did his reporting. He doesnt spin anything, he simply offers facts and common sense and lets viewers make their own decision. And it worked for him and he became famous. You don’t really see many people like him, who dont force their objective into their reporting or journalism.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[URL="http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3061015&page=1"][SIZE=3][COLOR=#800080]http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3061015&page=1[/COLOR][/SIZE][/URL]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Again Fox decided to report this issue. NBC, ABC, and CBS chose not to probably doesn’t vibe with their objective. Pretty sad. [/SIZE]
[/FONT]

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmdub130;633950]i'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit on that one[/quote]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Honestly i mean it. Obviously if I win I would also have some sweet ass cars, but my daily driver would be a hybrid. You’ve seen how far ive come – I mean honestly would you ever think I would drive a 4cyl Honda 10 years ago? 5 years ago? 3 years ago?[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]But I don’t know if I would drive it that much, I could imagine living in a sweet ass house (that’s completely trashed after a couple months) that I never leave and just drink myself retarded night after night…..[/FONT][/COLOR]

Re: Climategate
 

[I]"So what should we do about the threat of global warming?

First, calm down.

Second, if the world is warming, it is much more reasonable to adjust to it, rather than try to stop it. If sea levels rise, we can build dykes and move back from the coasts. It worked for Holland.

Farmers can plant different crops or move north. Russian farmers farmed northern Siberia for centuries. When the area became cold and desolate, the farmers moved south.

Far better to keep studying global warming, let the science develop and adjust to it if it happens, rather than wreck life as we know it by trying to stop it. "[/I]

some people just hate logic, not me

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmpetert;633966][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Honestly i mean it. Obviously if I win I would also have some sweet ass cars, but my daily driver would be a hybrid. You’ve seen how far ive come – I mean honestly would you ever think I would drive a 4cyl Honda 10 years ago? 5 years ago? 3 years ago?[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][B]But I don’t know if I would drive it that much, I could imagine living in a sweet ass house (that’s completely trashed after a couple months) that I never leave and just drink myself retarded night after night….[/B].[/FONT][/COLOR][/quote]

that i can beleive

Re: Climategate
 

I wish the water would rise 4' because then I'd have water front property instead of water view.

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmdub130;633950]i'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit on that one[/quote]
If I win a lottery ....[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Yju1_WD9Q&feature=related]YouTube - 1969 camaro burnout[/ame] something , more like this .

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmpetert;633961][FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]Here is a nice Truth - Myth column from John Stossel from a couple years ago. I remember being forced to watch 20/20 when i was a real little kid with my parents (back in the day when people only had 1 tv). The only part of the show i liked was when John Stossell did his reporting. He doesnt spin anything, he simply offers facts and common sense and lets viewers make their own decision. And it worked for him and he became famous. You don’t really see many people like him, who dont force their objective into their reporting or journalism.[/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri][URL="http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3061015&page=1"][SIZE=3][COLOR=#800080]http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3061015&page=1[/COLOR][/SIZE][/URL][/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]Again Fox decided to report this issue. NBC, ABC, and CBS chose not to probably doesn’t vibe with their objective. Pretty sad. [/SIZE][/FONT]
[/quote]
Nice read . In 6th grade , we had a group come in with oxygen mask's/tanks , chemical suit and firemans jacket and told us " by the time you get out of high school , you will have to wear the O mask/tank during daytime because of the smog" .... graduated 1982 :) I would love to run into them today and kick their a$$es !!

Re: Climategate
 

I thought all the scientist said we where headed to global cooling? Whats up with that.

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=budw38;633978]If I win a lottery ....[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Yju1_WD9Q&feature=related]YouTube - 1969 camaro burnout[/url] something , more like this .[/quote]

nothing like a carbureted enginge, makes me wanna go fire up my bike and piss of the neighbors

Re: Climategate
 

Well last night one of the major networks did a story on climategate. They did not give any details about what was really in the emails and only made it out to be something that crazy anti global warming people where talking about on the internet. Its like they ran the story because they had but did not want to do.

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=firstdown;634068]Well last night one of the major networks did a story on climategate. They did not give any details about what was really in the emails and only made it out to be something that crazy anti global warming people where talking about on the internet. Its like they ran the story because they had but did not want to do.[/quote]

they ran the same type of story on headline news(a sister network of cnn), this morning, it was bs, i tried to explain to my fiancee what it really was but seemed not to care, she beleives in global warming btw

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmdub130;634072]they ran the same type of story on headline news(a sister network of cnn), this morning, it was bs, i tried to explain to my fiancee what it really was but seemed not to care, she beleives in global warming btw[/quote]

When it came up both my wife and her friend said they knew nothing about it and after the story still dodn't know anything about it.

Re: Climategate
 

^and they probably say it's all lies and won't bother to actually check it out

Re: Climategate
 

More than 1,700 scientists have agreed to sign a statement defending the "professional integrity" of global warming research. They were responding to a round-robin request from the Met Office, which has spent four days collecting signatures. The initiative is a sign of how worried it is that e-mails stolen from the University of East Anglia are fueling skepticism about man-made global warming at a critical moment in talks on carbon emissions.

One scientist said that he felt under pressure to sign the circular or risk losing work. The Met Office admitted that many of the signatories did not work on climate change.

[url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6951029.ece]Top scientists rally to the defence of the Met Office - Times Online[/url]

Re: Climategate
 

What's Going to Happen?

A follow-up report by the IPCC released in April 2007 warned that global warming could lead to large-scale food and water shortages and have catastrophic effects on wildlife.

• Sea level could rise between 7 and 23 inches (18 to 59 centimeters) by century's end, the IPCC's February 2007 report projects. Rises of just 4 inches (10 centimeters) could flood many South Seas islands and swamp large parts of Southeast Asia.

• Some hundred million people live within 3 feet (1 meter) of mean sea level, and much of the world's population is concentrated in vulnerable coastal cities. In the U.S., Louisiana and Florida are especially at risk.

• Glaciers around the world could melt, causing sea levels to rise while creating water shortages in regions dependent on runoff for fresh water.

• Strong hurricanes, droughts, heat waves, wildfires, and other natural disasters may become commonplace in many parts of the world. The growth of deserts may also cause food shortages in many places.

• More than a million species face extinction from disappearing habitat, changing ecosystems, and acidifying oceans.

• The ocean's circulation system, known as the ocean conveyor belt, could be permanently altered, causing a mini-ice age in Western Europe and other rapid changes.

• At some point in the future, warming could become uncontrollable by creating a so-called positive feedback effect. Rising temperatures could release additional greenhouse gases by unlocking methane in permafrost and undersea deposits, freeing carbon trapped in sea ice, and causing increased evaporation of water.
taken fron NatGeo article

Re: Climategate
 

[I]"So what should we do about the threat of global warming?

First, calm down.

Second, if the world is warming, it is much more reasonable to adjust to it, rather than try to stop it. If sea levels rise, we can build dykes and move back from the coasts. It worked for Holland.

Farmers can plant different crops or move north. Russian farmers farmed northern Siberia for centuries. When the area became cold and desolate, the farmers moved south.

Far better to keep studying global warming, let the science develop and adjust to it if it happens, rather than wreck life as we know it by trying to stop it. "[/I]

Re: Climategate
 

So dmek25 you want us to believe all this from IPCC scientest that have been shown to be a fraud? How can anyone take anything they report now as serious factual information?

Re: Climategate
 

im not sure what i believe. but i know that all of the years of dumping all this crap into the environment will catch up to us, sooner or later. that's why when i hear drill baby drill, i cringe. funny how that was a republican catch phrase during the election, but not one whisper of it now( from anyone)

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=dmek25;637714]im not sure what i believe. but i know that all of the years of dumping all this crap into the environment will catch up to us, sooner or later. that's why when i hear drill baby drill, i cringe. funny how that was a republican catch phrase during the election, but not one whisper of it now( from anyone)[/quote]

Well when the Dems have control how could the Rep. get more drilling passed. I know its not dead here in Va. and will probably become a bigger topic when our new Governor takes office. Well the fact is we need oil and why not use what we have here while we are coming up with ways to get away from our use of oil.

Re: Climategate
 

I wonder what a polar bear tastes like? I'd bet it's awesome with Sweet Baby Rays!

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=dmek25;637714]im not sure what i believe. but i know that all of the years of dumping all this crap into the environment will catch up to us, sooner or later. that's why when i hear drill baby drill, i cringe. [B]funny how that was a republican catch phrase during the election, but not one whisper of it now( from anyone[/B])[/quote]

atleast they would have been true to their word, unlike some people cough..obama, cough...bring troops home

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;637740]I wonder what a polar bear tastes like? I'd bet it's awesome with Sweet Baby Rays![/quote]

How great would it be to have one of these guys:

[url=http://www.bearskin-rugs.com/polar-bear-rugs-c-62.html]Polar Bear Rugs - Polar Bear Rug for sale[/url]


Alright back to what i said before. If i win the lottery, im going to sport a Prius, but im gonna get a polor bear skin rug, and a little baby polor bear skin rug as my bathroom floor mat. Elegance meets green.

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmdub130;637777]atleast they would have been true to their word, unlike some people cough..obama, cough...bring troops home[/quote]
To be fair Obama said he would start pulling out of Iraq and put more resources in Afganistan which is pretty much what he is doing. He did wait 3 months to provide some of what they asked for while guys are dying at an increasing rate but he has done what he said.

Re: Climategate
 

This week at a speech at the Copenhagen climate talks, Gore said crumbling ice sheets, disappearing glaciers and the shrinking Arctic ice cap were feeding global warming and fuelling rising sea levels.

He cited new research from climatologist Dr Wieslaw Maslowski that showed the Arctic ice cap may have shrunk to record low-levels last year.

'Some of the models suggest to Dr. Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire polar ice cap during some summer months could be completely ice free within five to seven years,' Gore said.

But the American scientist rejected the claim.

'It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,' Dr Maslowski said. 'I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.'
Dr Maslowki, who works at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in California, said that his latest results gave a six-year projection for the melting of 80 per cent of the ice, but said he expected some ice to remain beyond 2020.
'
I was very explicit that we were talking about near-ice-free conditions and not completely ice-free conditions in the northern ocean,' he said.

'I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this. It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at, based on the information I provided to Al Gore’s office.'

Mr Gore’s office later admitted that the figure of 75 per cent had been used by Dr Maslowksi as a 'ballpark figure' several years ago during a private conversation.


Read more: [URL="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1236090/Inconvenient-truth-Al-Gore-hes-caught-exaggerating-threat-global-warming--again.html#ixzz0ZmEcVEWU"][COLOR=#0000ff]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1236090/Inconvenient-truth-Al-Gore-hes-caught-exaggerating-threat-global-warming--again.html#ixzz0ZmEcVEWU[/COLOR][/URL]

Re: Climategate
 

I just realized that I have already used several foreign news articles. Why is the American media largely not reporting this stuff.

Re: Climategate
 

Maybe if Tiger Woods banged a polar bear people would care about this story.

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=dmek25;637714]im not sure what i believe. but i know that all of the years of dumping all this crap into the environment will catch up to us, sooner or later. that's why when i hear drill baby drill, i cringe. funny how that was a republican catch phrase during the election, [B]but not one whisper of it now[/B]( from anyone)[/quote]

Not so fast Dmek! I've been advocating drilling off of VA for awhile now. They've also said (VA Gov) they're going to look into high-speed rail too. They must be listening to me.

I've got a question. Why are there so many Pennsylvanians living in VA? This isn't a joke. Does PA suck that bad?

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=mlmpetert;640137]I just realized that I have already used several foreign news articles. Why is the American media largely not reporting this stuff.[/quote]

Daily Mail is a tabloid newspaper, one would hope our media doesn't follow their lead. BTW "Climategate" isn't as big of a deal as you think it is and there isn't much mischief going on. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendroclimatology#Limitations"]They're merely disregarding usage of tree rings to ascertain temperature measurements[/URL]. I would have done the same. Why use a method that tells something different from temperature you've recorded with a thermometer? I would move alone if I were one of you people.

[quote]The divergence problem is the disagreement between the temperatures measured by the thermometers (instrumental temperatures) on one side and the temperatures reconstructed from the widths of tree rings on the other side, in the northern forests.

While the thermometer records indicate a substantial warming trend, many tree rings do not display a corresponding change in their width. A temperature trend extracted from tree rings alone would not show any substantial warming. The temperature graphs calculated in these two ways thus "diverge" from one another since the 1950s, which is the origin of the term.[/quote]

Re: Climategate
 

im talking about people who matter. you know, the ones who make policy? not someone that is as irrelevant as you

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;640169]Not so fast Dmek! I've been advocating drilling off of VA for awhile now. They've also said (VA Gov) they're going to look into high-speed rail too. They must be listening to me.

I've got a question. Why are there so many Pennsylvanians living in VA? This isn't a joke. Does PA suck that bad?[/quote]

In Tidewater Va I see more people from NJ and NY moving into our area to get away from the high cost of living and high taxes.

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=saden1;640178]Daily Mail is a tabloid newspaper, one would hope our media doesn't follow their lead. BTW "Climategate" isn't as big of a deal as you think it is and there isn't much mischief going on. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendroclimatology#Limitations"]They're merely disregarding usage of tree rings to ascertain temperature measurements[/URL]. I would have done the same. Why use a method that tells something different from temperature you've recorded with a thermometer? I would move alone if I were one of you people.[/quote]


It's really interesting how some think "climategate" debunks all of the science, all of the research, and indisputable data behind climate change. I can certainly understand people having issues with Al Gore on some level. But this isn't some wild theory spun out of thin air by Al Gore alone for his own personal gain - although he has profited handsomely from the ongoing debate. I think because Al Gore is a politician, a liberal politician I might add, an element of politics has been injected into the discussion that has been divisive.

I've yet to hear anyone step forward who has actually read all the emails, but what I can gather is that these scientists were, at a minimum, guilty of trying to keep some of the science from becoming politicized when, in fact, their perceived manipulating of data has done just that.

In the end though I don't think this controversy will have any long term traction to reverse the consensus building around the issue or the legislation being pushed through Congress.

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=dmek25;640187]im talking about people who matter. you know, the ones who make policy? not someone that is as irrelevant as you[/quote]

Seriously, why do all of you move down here? I mean you guys have been voting in liberals for years, if not decades. It should be a effing paradise up there, right? Why do you come down here with all of the backward conservatives and whack job libertarians? Are you trying to convert us to trifling? I can't go a day without seeing a PA license plate on the road. There are also VA licensed cars that are plastered with Steelers and Iggles BS too. That's a sure give away. Why move away from your progressive utopia if it so great?

Re: Climategate
 

im from Lancaster county, home of the ultra conservative republican. but the are a ton of backwards rednecks here, too. that's what your seeing. Pa. is a beautiful place, but the people as a whole aren't very friendly. you can definitely tell the difference once you cross the Mason Dixon line. maybe they are looking for work? and if everyone has the same mind set that you have, it could be entertaining :)

Re: Climategate
 

[quote=dmek25;640241]im from Lancaster county, home of the ultra conservative republican. but the are a ton of backwards rednecks here, too. that's what your seeing. Pa. is a beautiful place, but the people as a whole aren't very friendly. you can definitely tell the difference once you cross the Mason Dixon line. maybe they are looking for work? and if everyone has the same mind set that you have, it could be entertaining :)[/quote]

I'll tell you what. How about you trade us all of your rednecks for our liberals? We can train your "up round state college" hill folk to have some manners. I've done it before. Our liberals are already pissed off assholes. They should fit in nicely up there. So is it a deal?

Re: Climategate
 

Climategate”
[B]Hacked e-mails show climate scientists in a bad light but don't change scientific consensus on global warming.[/B]
In late November 2009, more than 1,000 e-mails between scientists at the Climate Research Unit of the U.K.’s University of East Anglia were stolen and made public by an as-yet-unnamed hacker. Climate skeptics are claiming that they show scientific misconduct that amounts to the complete fabrication of …