[bearcat6]

Here is the weather channel founders' take on climate change. Gee I wonder why reports like this are never in the news in this country?
Climate change is a lie: Global warming 'not real' claims Weather Channel founder | Nature | News | Daily Express

 

[Kevin Gibson]

Well sorry but that flies in the face of the best science out there. The greenhouse gasses that are in the air can be sampled. And from those samples, you can tell if it's methane (which is typically natural) or CO2, which is mostly man made. From ice samples, we know how much CO2 has been in the atmostphere for millions of years, so that's a pretty solid baseline. And the CO2 levels we have over the past century have been rising dramatically. And while the amount of methane in the air has risen, it's not nearly as dramatic as CO2. And methane can be both nature and man made. So all the evidence points to the change in climate being man made.

So we know that global warming is something that really is happening, and the case for it being man made is very compelling. But since that doesn't fit people's pre-conceived notions, they look for every sort of way to deny it.

Now I don't subscribe to the so called "solutions" provided by the left, but we certainly do need to be addressing the issue, rather than spending all our time trying to make evermore desperate attempts at denying that it's happening.

 

[CaptainGyro]

From ice samples, we know how much CO2 has been in the atmostphere for millions of years, so that's a pretty solid baseline. And the CO2 levels we have over the past century have been rising dramatically.

No offense, Kevin, because we've all been bombarded by the same storyline, but this is the kind of shallow analysis by people who have very little scientific education (i.e., most reporters and politicians) that the "climate science" community counts on to keep the grant money flowing.

Most quotes of CO2 concentrations kind of hope you'll ignore the units, PPM or parts per million, so let's get a handle on that. Imagine a building a thousand meters high, taller that any yet built (and about 2.5 times as high as the twin towers, to give some perspective.) That building would be one million millimeters high. So, measured against this imaginary giant skyscraper, one part per million would be a millimeter.

Over the earth's history, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has varied from near zero to almost 10,000 PPM. The widely accepted value for the post-Ice Age, pre-industrial concentration is about 290 PPM. The value currently stands at about 395 PPM. Again, measuring against the side of our imaginary thousand meter building, we're talking about a column of CO2 that started out reaching about up to your shin, and now reaches up to, well, a little higher on your shin. In the totality of the atmosphere, these are infinitesimal percentages.

So, how do "climate scientists" get around this inconvenient truth? Why, they lop off the top 99.9% of the graph, and only show you the bottom four feet of that giant skyscraper. To a layperson who slept through statistics class (like Al Gore), these graphs look alarming indeed.

If Global Warming were real, someone would be making money from it. Think about it...when you say you believe that the earth is getting warmer, you're saying that you know the future, and who among us wouldn't love to know the future when we choose our investments? And yet, the "sure thing" of Global Warming hasn't caused so much as a ripple in the financial community. Farm land in northern Canada ought to be skyrocketing in price; it isn't. You can still buy beachfront property that (the finger-waggers tell us) is sure to be underwater in the near future, and easily find an insurance company that will cover it for you.

Just as in the past when "scientists" made alarming predictions (remember when AIDS was about to "break out" into the heterosexual community, and the Y2K bug meant that our computers would all revert to smoldering chunks of plastic and silicon?), the only ones who are getting rich over Global Warming are the academics. The spigots of grant money are wide open, and for a while the alarmists and Chicken Littles will prosper handsomely. Eventually, however, just as in the past, the hubbub will die down, calmer heads will prevail, and we will all look back and realize how silly it all was.

 

[Snake45]

Well sorry but that flies in the face of the best science out there. The greenhouse gasses that are in the air can be sampled. And from those samples, you can tell if it's methane (which is typically natural) or CO2, which is mostly man made. From ice samples, we know how much CO2 has been in the atmostphere for millions of years, so that's a pretty solid baseline. And the CO2 levels we have over the past century have been rising dramatically. And while the amount of methane in the air has risen, it's not nearly as dramatic as CO2. And methane can be both nature and man made. So all the evidence points to the change in climate being man made.

So we know that global warming is something that really is happening, and the case for it being man made is very compelling. But since that doesn't fit people's pre-conceived notions, they look for every sort of way to deny it.

Now I don't subscribe to the so called "solutions" provided by the left, but we certainly do need to be addressing the issue, rather than spending all our time trying to make evermore desperate attempts at denying that it's happening.

With all due respect, I think that your "science" is nothing more than government-funded propaganda.

Do you believe what these same people say about guns and gun control? No? Then why on earth would you believe anything these known, proven liars have to say on any subject?

 

[Kevin Gibson]

Well it's not the same people, you should be able to discern that. The science is really quite simple.

Still, you won't see me buddying up to Al Gore. There are a lot of great things we can, and are doing that won't crush our economy. In fact, there's a good deal of "renewable" energies that can really boost our economy.

Solar technology is finally to the point to where it's truly viable, and there have been some huge leaps in solar technology in the past couple of years. And solar clearly isn't THE technology, I reject any sort of "silver bullet" technology that does it all; none do. But it has a very bright (no pun intended) future as long as we're not like Oklahoma and start taking legislative steps to block it.

Still, anyone who thinks we're going to get completely away from fossil fuels is smoking something. We just need to use fossil fuels for the things that only fossil fuels can do, and be a little smarter about how we make our energy. We don't have to derail our economy just to clean up our act.

But the people who want to expand the use of coal either have a very short memory (who wants to return to acid rain, and smog drills?), or just don't care at all about the environment. There is no such thing as "clean coal". There is cleaner coal, which is still nasty stuff.

 

[Skeptic49]

If anyone really believed "Climate Change" was a disaster, we would not be blocking every attempt to build nuclear power plants to replace coal in this country.
Geoff
Who notes the climate has been warming most of his life, but the last 15 years have been pretty much the same.

 

[Javlin]

But the people who want to expand the use of coal either have a very short memory (who wants to return to acid rain, and smog drills?), or just don't care at all about the environment. There is no such thing as "clean coal". There is cleaner coal, which is still nasty stuff.

I do not buy that about the coal plant/acid rain.I have lived 2 miles as the crow flies from a coal power plant for 40 years now never ever an issue.I will say due to our friends at the EPA they have had to add scrubbers to the plant but do not think they are operational yet will have to check.I had a fella who use to work for me about five years ago and was hired by MS Power and was going to work eventually in that section.But on any given day the only thing you ever see coming out of those stacks is steam for the most part and that's of higher concentration during the winter months.

As to the GW deal if memory is correct we should of lost some beach/sand out front were I live?Looks to me alright out there.The fact that what warms this planet the most is that big yellow ball in the sky and Sun spot activity.We had a fella on a hurricane forum who like to do something called space weather of all things and I thought along with some others "kooky".That fella three weeks in advance in 2005 predicted a TS formation in frick'in Dec. within a few day parameter?? Think it was the Z/Zeta space weather??

 

[Kevin Gibson]

Perhaps you would be surprised to know that there are several new nuclear power plants under construction right now. The Energy Policy Act of 2007 cleared the way.

And while I believe global warming is real, and that man is playing an active role in it, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a "disaster".

But anyone who doesn't believe in climate change ought to talk to people in the South. Ask them about their winters when they were kids, and their winters now. In the part of Arkansas where I lived, snow happened a couple of times per year, with 6" of snow on the ground being considered "heavy". The most I've seen snow last in the past 10 years was about 3 weeks.

Contrast that to 40 years ago, and a snow day was nearly a weekly event, and much of the winter there would be snow on the ground.

And NASA is re-locating buildings right now to get them further away from the water, this due to water level changes.

It's real, it's happening; but I don't think it's a disaster. I think we're a good ways off from the disasters the left preaches about.

 

[Snake45]

I've said this many times: When Al Gore starts living his life like Ed Begley Jr., then I'll at least believe that he believes the "global warming" nonsense. Until then he can FO, ESAD.

Until then, as far as I'm concerned, it's not science, it's a religion, and a real stupid one, too. And possibly the biggest fraud ever perpetrated upon mankind.

And when I hear high priests of the religion say that nonbelievers should be silenced, or even imprisoned as criminals, I take that as further proof that it's nonsense that they can't defend.

 

[CaptainGyro]

...as far as I'm concerned, it's not science, it's a religion, and a real stupid one, too. And possibly the biggest fraud ever perpetrated upon mankind.

And when I hear high priests of the religion say that nonbelievers should be silenced, or even imprisoned as criminals, I take that as further proof that it's nonsense that they can't defend.

Bullseye. Well said.

 

[DavidE]

Acid Rain was stopped by Sulfur scrubbing technology in the 1980s.

Skeptic49 is right on, it isn't about the environment as much as hamstringing the US on domestic energy, costs of energy, and manufacturing, and making sure other countries get the advantage in those areas.

 

[Kevin Gibson]

I've said this many times: When Al Gore starts living his life like Ed Begley Jr., then I'll at least believe that he believes the "global warming" nonsense. Until then he can FO, ESAD.

Until then, as far as I'm concerned, it's not science, it's a religion, and a real stupid one, too. And possibly the biggest fraud ever perpetrated upon mankind.

And when I hear high priests of the religion say that nonbelievers should be silenced, or even imprisoned as criminals, I take that as further proof that it's nonsense that they can't defend.

So because Al Gore is a douche-bag, you ignore science. Well that solved the problem.

This notion that you won't believe a scientist because they work for the government is really quite laughable. I guess you're not afraid to eat foods deemed poisonous by the FDA too? And I'll bet you ignore the stats on seatbelts if it comes from the NTSD.

I'll be the first to admit that there has been unscrupulous scientists, but their religious fervor doesn't erase all the massive scientific evidence. Just because someone's a douche, doesn't mean they're automatically wrong. I know lots of people who are douches but are right about things.

You know the Koch brothers felt the same way. So they got together with some oil industry guys and hired a conservative scientist to put this global warming thing to rest once and for all. So the guy who got his check from the oil industry and the Koch brothers (meaning, he had economic incentive to tell them what they wanted to hear), came back and said global warming is absolutely real, and is probably caused by mankind. At the very least, it's greatly exacerbated by man.

Guess you won't believe that guy either though.

 

[TommyGunn]

The problem I have with globular warming is for the past 15 years, we haven't been warming. I also resent being told "it's settled science."
It isn't. There's no such thing, IMHO.
The old PBS series Carl Sagan did 34 years ago, "COSMOS," was recently re-done and modernized. I have been watching the Blu-Ray set I have. One of the later episodes in this series presents the best, most coherent argument in favor of man-made GW I have heard yet. The problem is that it did not deal with the last 15 years of stagnation.
The episode also claimed that the output from the sun has been even over past decades. I already knew enough about recent research to know that many scientists no longer accept this.
One thing the episode did do was to review many forgotten inventions and developments that have been made over the past 150 years, and which have largely been forgotten, of energy production methods that I really do think would work well in equatorial areas, or even other areas. It's a shame these have been forgotten.
Some, while representing 19th century tech, would actually work very well. A solar powered irrigation system that was developed just prior to World War One seems very promising for Egypt and other arid, hot sunny climates.
But the episode also bolstered windmill generators and other solarcell systems that, from all I've heard, are "not ready for prime time" -- yet.
I stand between the rock of being a skeptic of man-made globular warming and the hard place of not wanting to retreat to pouring out sulfer dioxides and other pollutants into the atmosphere.
We will need alternate energy anyway, while petroleum seems to have been given a rebirth due to fracking, I don't think it'll last forever, and when we actually need alternate energies, it would be nice if they were better developed.

 

[TommyGunn]

So because Al Gore is a douche-bag, you ignore science. Well that solved the problem.

This notion that you won't believe a scientist because they work for the government is really quite laughable. I guess you're not afraid to eat foods deemed poisonous by the FDA too? And I'll bet you ignore the stats on seatbelts if it comes from the NTSD.

I'll be the first to admit that there has been unscrupulous scientists, but their religious fervor doesn't erase all the massive scientific evidence. Just because someone's a douche, doesn't mean they're automatically wrong. I know lots of people who are douches but are right about things.

You know the Koch brothers felt the same way. So they got together with some oil industry guys and hired a conservative scientist to put this global warming thing to rest once and for all. So the guy who got his check from the oil industry and the Koch brothers (meaning, he had economic incentive to tell them what they wanted to hear), came back and said global warming is absolutely real, and is probably caused by mankind. At the very least, it's greatly exacerbated by man.

Guess you won't believe that guy either though.

Problem is, scientists are all human and all have agendas and all like to get grants of $$ (usually from .gov). And that's true on both sides of the issue.
If Shell Oil hires a scientists to prove GW is baloney, the guy's obviously prejudiced because Big Oil is paying him. But if a scientiist is working for a Green Energy Foundation and says GW is real and man made, but he's been working under a grant from the government (which has a liberal pro greenie agenda now) he's also prejudiced by his position.

So far as being a "douche," since when did one's character become irrelevant in trying to evaluate credibility?
It doesn't make the science wrong but it surely makes it suspect.

To whit: If Obama told me July followed June, before agreeing with him, I'd check my calender.

 

[Snake45]

Kevin, I'm all for freedom of religion. If you or anyone else wants to follow the Global Warming Religion, and perform its rites and ablutions, and pledge it their tithes and services, I have no problem with that. Just don't demand that everyone else (i.e., me) subscribe to or support it under penatly of law. Fair enough?

Global Warmers make Scientologists look almost sane.

 

[Richard__Head]

Well said Snake45!
And they need to take their recycling BS out of our faces as well.
Penn and Teller did a great 2 part video on Recycling BS, and its right on the money, even though they are trying hard to discredit it.

 

[William R. Moore]

Perhaps you would be surprised to know that there are several new nuclear power plants under construction right now. The Energy Policy Act of 2007 cleared the way.

Ah, no. There are several new nuke plants in the permitting process and several sites have done preliminary site prep work to facilitate construction (assuming the permits get issued) but there's not several plants under constuction. IIRC, there's one actually under construction.

The big thing the EPA 2007 did was consolidate the permitting process so that it was one gorilla rather than a bunch of chimps, all of whom had to approve aspects of the project. Not that I'm casting aspersions on the dedicated public servants who staff the regulatory agencies, my metaphorical thesarus is AWOL. I won't bother addressing the folks who show up at public hearings to spout fantasies that make the Luddities seem reasonable folks.

 

[bearcat6]

Well said Snake45!
And they need to take their recycling BS out of our faces as well.
Penn and Teller did a great 2 part video on Recycling BS, and its right on the money, even though they are trying hard to discredit it.

Penn and Teller were great. I am surprised that they didn't know Iron Eyes Cody was not a real Indian. He was an actor of Sicilian descent.

 

[Skeptic49]

Perhaps you would be surprised to know that there are several new nuclear power plants under construction right now. The Energy Policy Act of 2007 cleared the way.

One was just cancelled and a local power company had to refund money to it's customers.

With thousands of nuisance lawsuits ongoing ... fuggeddaboudit!

Geoff
Who is a big Thorium fan.

 

[Kevin Gibson]

Ah, no. There are several new nuke plants in the permitting process and several sites have done preliminary site prep work to facilitate construction (assuming the permits get issued) but there's not several plants under constuction. IIRC, there's one actually under construction.

The big thing the EPA 2007 did was consolidate the permitting process so that it was one gorilla rather than a bunch of chimps, all of whom had to approve aspects of the project. Not that I'm casting aspersions on the dedicated public servants who staff the regulatory agencies, my metaphorical thesarus is AWOL. I won't bother addressing the folks who show up at public hearings to spout fantasies that make the Luddities seem reasonable folks.

There are 4 under construction right now. There are another 16 in the permitting stages. Initially there were 28 permits filed, but immediately following those permits the economy collapsed, the electricity demand dramatically dropped and the floor fell out on natural gas, making it very difficult to justify the expenditure for a nuke plant. That's why most applications were rescinded, not because of opposition. In fact, 2 of the 4 being built right now were hit with environmental suits, but those suits were dismissed in 2012.