• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Twelve-Month Long Drop in Global Temperatures Wipes Out Century of Global Warming

Random8145 said:
I disagree. If we get record cold temperatures, it is blamed on "global climate change" (if you notice that's the new lingo; no one says "global warming" anymore). If a place gets a record heat wave, it's blamed on "global climate change."
Click to expand...

I think everyone is missing the truly obvious answer here:

God did it. When god wants to make the world hot, he does. When god wants to make the world cold, he does.

No matter what happens I reject your hypothesis and know that it was God.


Or
.
 
(Editted.)

Decided not to get into a theological debate....

It should suffice to say that I disagree w/ MPH and his theory that God changes the weather. And also that I believe in God, all the same.
 
Air Squire said:
(Editted.)

Decided not to get into a theological debate....

It should suffice to say that I disagree w/ MPH and his theory that God changes the weather. And also that I believe in God, all the same.
Click to expand...
I'm just going to assume that he's in the process of making a prison shiv, all the while quoting his dad, and telling us that we're going to hell...
 
Air Squire said:
(Editted.)

Decided not to get into a theological debate....

It should suffice to say that I disagree w/ MPH and his theory that God changes the weather. And also that I believe in God, all the same.
Click to expand...

I just assumed he was being sarcastic, but then again my sarcasm meter hasn't been functioning correctly lately.
 
Achilles said:
I just assumed he was being sarcastic, but then again my sarcasm meter hasn't been functioning correctly lately.
Click to expand...

No... God told me he was changing the weather.

Edit: I'm going to assume y'all still haven't figured out I was joking. My entire point was the fact that just because people talk about "global climate change" doesn't mean that our weather is ruled by any understandable system. Someone could have just as easily come up with a hypothesis called "Creator Climate Change" not only would it have alliteration, but it would also be just as predictable as Al Gore's ideas.

When the mean temperature rises, Al Gore says: "The Icecaps are melting, the sea is rising the world is getting hotter. I've predicted all of this!!!" When the temperature falls, Al Gore says: "Oh no! The effects of 'Global Climate Change' are worse than we feared! I predicted all of this!!!"

Someone who believed in the hypothetical "Creator Climate Change" system would be able to say the same thing: "God warned me this would happen!"

A reasonable person would accept the fact that we don't really have a f---ing clue whats happening and it's been that way for millennia. Until someone can predict the weather two days ahead of time I'm not going to trust much of what the weather guessers say.
 
"Global warming," the average increase in global temperature (with the excpetion of this year, which means diddly for several years until a new trend can be established), is happening. Climate change is the effect of global warming. They are buzz words, and therefore bound to be misused, misunderstood. The shift from the words, "global warming" to "climate change" is not so much a backpedalling and flip-flop as it is a now slightly better-informed public (although not by much if you ask me).

I don't know if it's caused by human activity or not, but I am willing to bet that if it IS, it's far too late to do anything about it with Carbon Credits. The only thing I AM sure of is that some of the proposed emergency solutions, if miscalculated, seriously CAN fuck up the Earth for the purposes of our living on it. Some politician running away with a quick fix is what I'm most afraid of.

On the whole though, I'm pretty stoked for the climate debate over the next 50 years. Regardless of it's validity, the hype and the hysteria has created a will and desire to move away from fossil fues, and therefore a GOLDEN oppurtunity for this country.

Cry all you want about the manufacturing and technical base moving overseas, but tarrifs, subsidies, or buying shitty American products aren't going to bring it back. Green industry/manufacturing and energy WILL. We're the only country in the world with the sheer capital weight and innovative culture to pull it off. The technology to "save the Earth" is going to be made in this country, and we are going to make a killing.
 
Cry all you want about the manufacturing and technical base moving overseas, but tarrifs, subsidies, or buying shitty American products aren't going to bring it back. Green industry/manufacturing and energy WILL. We're the only country in the world with the sheer capital weight and innovative culture to pull it off. The technology to "save the Earth" is going to be made in this country, and we are going to make a killing.
Click to expand...
Before that, one of two things must happen:
-We find a cheaper, more efficient alternative energy source than fossil fuel
-We run out of fossil fuel

I think number two will happen first.
 
eddie said:
"Global warming," the average increase in global temperature (with the excpetion of this year, which means diddly for several years until a new trend can be established), is happening. Climate change is the effect of global warming. They are buzz words, and therefore bound to be misused, misunderstood. The shift from the words, "global warming" to "climate change" is not so much a backpedalling and flip-flop as it is a now slightly better-informed public (although not by much if you ask me).
Click to expand...
By saying ""Global warming," the average increase in global temperature (with the excpetion of this year, which means diddly for several years until a new trend can be established), is happening." you imply that it is a law or proven theorem. I still think it's a theory. Again, the earth has been around for 4.5 billion years, and we know about a timble's worth of it's history. What was the climate like in 3.5 billion BC? Don't know - then you can't prove a trend or a cycle. You'd have to know the entire history of the entire climate for this planet in order to make a proper analysis. The last 200,000 years of our existence amounts to 0.0044% of the data points for the planet. Hardly scientific. Shit, scientists can't agree on what the temperatures were in the last century!
 
Spekkio said:
Before that, one of two things must happen:
-We find a cheaper, more efficient alternative energy source than fossil fuel
-We run out of fossil fuel

I think number two will happen first.
Click to expand...

Despite likely overstated "Saudi and friends" reserves, I'm fairly sure we aren't going to run out of the black stuff that quickly. It could get a lot more expensive because exploration and some of the new extraction processes are going to break bank, but running out is probably not the thing to worry about (However, know my bias, as petroleum exploration geology is one of my back up plans if Navy doesn't work out... :)).

And economical alternative energy production IS already happening via a whole slew of private solar, geothermal, nuclear, and tidal energy projects. Although I was talking more about the efficiency end of the equation with technologies that reduce your killowatt useage; green architecture, improved hybrids, and such.
 
Global Cooling article from Newsweek, 1975. I especially like the "little Ice Age" thing...


april_28__1975_newsweek___the_cooling_world___by_peter_gwynne.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg
 
phrogpilot73 said:
By saying ""Global warming," the average increase in global temperature (with the excpetion of this year, which means diddly for several years until a new trend can be established), is happening." you imply that it is a law or proven theorem. I still think it's a theory. Again, the earth has been around for 4.5 billion years, and we know about a timble's worth of it's history. What was the climate like in 3.5 billion BC? Don't know - then you can't prove a trend or a cycle. You'd have to know the entire history of the entire climate for this planet in order to make a proper analysis. The last 200,000 years of our existence amounts to 0.0044% of the data points for the planet. Hardly scientific. Shit, scientists can't agree on what the temperatures were in the last century!
Click to expand...

Well, 3.5 billion years ago, there was much more heat being generated at depth, in the Earth. It's a different situation now; apples and oranges. I'm not really sure why I need a complete record of the Earth's climate history to establish trends for the modern era (for which there are decent records and trends). :confused::(

We're in an interglacial period. Based on orbital eccentricities, we are supposed to be warming up. Yes, it's all technically theory, but then so is quantum mechanics. Most scientists agree the Earth is getting warmer, as it is expected to at this time. The heart of the argument is whether or not the rate of warming is abnormal.
 
Most knuckle heads think CAFE standards, hybrids cars, and light rail will make a difference. Transportation uses less then 15 % of fossil fuel. Tell me how solar power will work as a raw material for plastics, asphalt or any of the millions of other products we rely on. No matter how many econo box cars are put on the road we will need oil, and likely imported. Unless the climate change nuts embrace nuclear power we will never make a dent in their precious carbon footprint.

Homework assignment for all you smart college boys. How many nuclear power plants (pick a representative size, Palo Verde, Turkey Flat, San Onofre) will have to be built to make the U.S. oil and gas (natural) independent in electricity production alone? Conversely, consider the thousands of square miles of solar arrays and wind farms it will take to do the same.
 
eddie said:
The heart of the argument is whether or not the rate of warming is abnormal.
Click to expand...
No sir! The heart of the argument is whether humans are causing it, or more to the point, whether we will be ruined by fear mongers that insist on draconian policies to try to control the weather.
 
wink said:
No sir! The heart of the argument is whether humans are causing it, or more to the point, whether we will be ruined by fear mongers that insist on draconian policies to try to control the weather.
Click to expand...

AMEN!

I love the arrogance of men who think that we have control over global cycles that have been going on since before the dawn of Man....:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top