Page 145 of 205 FirstFirst ... 4595135141142143144145146147148149155195 ... LastLast
Results 3,601 to 3,625 of 5119
  1. #3601
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Post Count
    11,676
    ah. Got it.

    I have always said that the evidence will pile up either way, and it is looking like we are seeing the effects a bit sooner than I expected.

    The thing that bugs me the most is that the people who want to deny anything is happening also claim that addressing the problem will cause some huge economic harm, which is also easy to disprove.

    Fixing things not only isn't harmful, it helps. Seems like getting off our asses is a no-brainer, IMO.
    Absolutely agree. I dont think its going to cause any economic downfall except for petrol based companies, but they're already working on ways to people with green energy ala Elon Musk. And they will. But at least the world will stay around a little longer for future generations.

  2. #3602
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    94,654

    Neil deGrasse Tyson
    @neiltyson


    Anyone who thinks scientists like agreeing with one another has never attended a scientific conference.

    9:54 AM - Sep 10, 2017Neil deGrasse Tyson



    Damn, that smart knitter slapping all you red neck, anti-science white boys





  3. #3603
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    [Irma] generated enough ac ulated cyclone energy — the total wind energy generated over a storm's lifetime — to meet the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's definition of an average full Atlantic hurricane season
    Whoop-te-do...

    You know, they can only evaluate that metric for the ones seen over the last few decades, with the better satellites.

    There have been worse hurricaines in the past.
    Last edited by Wild Cobra; 09-13-2017 at 01:21 AM.

  4. #3604
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,093
    This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here
    Shouldn't it be Part 2, then?

  5. #3605
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    87,808
    Responding to a 5 year old post? Rent free

  6. #3606
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    49,258
    Absolutely agree. I dont think its going to cause any economic downfall except for petrol based companies, but they're already working on ways to people with green energy ala Elon Musk. And they will. But at least the world will stay around a little longer for future generations.
    "petrol based companies" is an interesting term.

    All sorts of industries and companies face change. Change is, ironically, the one constant in any free market.

    Companies have to reinvent themselves occassionally, or they go the way of buggy whip manufacturers.

    I read the annual statements of these companies and can tell you they are changing right now. That change is how they see themselves.

    "Oil and gas" companies are beginning to call themselves "energy companies".

    Sounds like just words, but it is a big shift. Rather than seeing themselves as just providing hydrocarbons, they are spending and developing green tech themselves, and they have a LOT of money to throw at renewables. The R & D budgets and spending on acquisitions show this.

    They know what the future is, and are moving that direction.

    They will quietly stop funding all this denier non-sense, because they will have their profits in different industries.

    Suckers like Darrin and Wild Cobra will have been useful idiots, because they helped muddy the waters, just like the people who believed that smoking didn't cause cancer, because they saw someone in a labcoat say so.

  7. #3607
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    49,258
    Whoop-te-do...

    You know, they can only evaluate that metric for the ones seen over the last few decades, with the better satellites.

    There have been worse hurricaines in the past.
    Implied:

    "X happened in the past. Therefore climate change now is not real and we aren't causing it."

    Let's see how this works logically.

    The earth was a molten ball of rock in the past. Therefore climate change now is not real and we aren't causing it.

    Rain happened in the past. Therefore climate change now is not real and we aren't causing it.

    Really bad rain happened in the past. Therefore climate change now is not real and we aren't causing it.

    A monkey scratched his balls in the past. Therefore climate change now is not real and we aren't causing it.


    The subject at hand is that we are seeing more and more extreme events, and those extreme events are getting worse, generally.

    No one denies that any given storm or event may have had, at some point, something worse. No one.

    That you think this statement is relevant simply says that you lack the critical thinking skills to understand that.

    Climate change denial is pseudoscience, and your statement directly supports that thesis.


    Thanks for providing more proof supporting my original post. I appreciate it.

  8. #3608
    non-essential Chris's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Post Count
    39,908

  9. #3609
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    87,808
    Should I draw a chalkboard with "no man-made climate change = more Koch $" going to an elephant?

    You can always "follow the money" in politics. The science is pretty clear at this point though. Which is why you discuss everything except the science

  10. #3610
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    49,258
    Also fits in rather well with the OP. (see thread le)

    Conspiracy theories, by their very nature, are pseudoscientific.

    In this case, you have an ad hominem/strawman attack.

    "Scientists want more government money for research, and their only motivation for doing what they do is money, so they will make findings that always conclude they get more money."

    The actual underlying science, and what scientists actually say, isn't addressed. This kind of conspiracy theory is mentioned specifically in the OP.

    Thank you for helping me prove my case.

  11. #3611
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    49,258
    Should I draw a chalkboard with "no man-made climate change = more Koch $" going to an elephant?

    You can always "follow the money" in politics. The science is pretty clear at this point though. Which is why you discuss everything except the science
    What has become increasingly clear is how anti-science the right has truly become, as if the truth is some liberal conspiracy.

  12. #3612
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Post Count
    11,676
    "petrol based companies" is an interesting term.

    All sorts of industries and companies face change. Change is, ironically, the one constant in any free market.

    Companies have to reinvent themselves occassionally, or they go the way of buggy whip manufacturers.

    I read the annual statements of these companies and can tell you they are changing right now. That change is how they see themselves.

    "Oil and gas" companies are beginning to call themselves "energy companies".

    Sounds like just words, but it is a big shift. Rather than seeing themselves as just providing hydrocarbons, they are spending and developing green tech themselves, and they have a LOT of money to throw at renewables. The R & D budgets and spending on acquisitions show this.

    They know what the future is, and are moving that direction.

    They will quietly stop funding all this denier non-sense, because they will have their profits in different industries.

    Suckers like Darrin and Wild Cobra will have been useful idiots, because they helped muddy the waters, just like the people who believed that smoking didn't cause cancer, because they saw someone in a labcoat say so.

    Again, I absolutely agree. And, by then, intelligence won't be insulted. It's the way business evolves and they won't hide behind the facade of "environmentalistism" like Elon Musk, who is a stone cold capitalist first and disproves he cares about the environment every time he burns countless thousands of gallons of jet and rocket fuel to travel and profit from sending needless rockets into space, but, , he's a "good guy" to the dummies that have to soapbox when they buy an "affordable" $40k Tesla or solar tiles that don't work.

    Sorry for the Musk rant. Admire and respect his business a en up to the point where he's a predator feeding on the stupid. But I think I might hate the audience that views him as an environmentalist trying to "save the world" instead of the sharp capitalist he is. Yeah, I do. I do hate them more. Just like I dislike idiots that say they are opposed to "slavery", "wage gaps" and "poverty" while they wear nike sneakers, drink Starbucks coffee and have Apple electronics. That's the hypocrisy I hate. (For the record, those aren't the only companies I don't support...but I'm also not a fanatical, faux soapboxer...) / rant.

  13. #3613
    non-essential Chris's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Post Count
    39,908

  14. #3614
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    49,258
    Whoop-te-do...

    You know, they can only evaluate that metric for the ones seen over the last few decades, with the better satellites.

    There have been worse hurricaines in the past.
    The earth was a molten ball of rock at one point "in the past". Failed troll logic.

    But hey, that is fine. Remember the le of the thread is that people like you suck at reasoning, so posts like this are exactly what I am looking for.

    Thanks.

  15. #3615
    The Boognish FuzzyLumpkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    19,255
    The earth was a molten ball of rock at one point "in the past". Failed troll logic.

    But hey, that is fine. Remember the le of the thread is that people like you suck at reasoning, so posts like this are exactly what I am looking for.

    Thanks.
    Nevermind that the "better" satellites as well as the ones that needed fixing all have shown that the upper atmosphere has been warming more than the UAH stooge and company have been claiming for the past 15 years. Notice how he has quieted down significantly?

  16. #3616
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    49,258
    Nevermind that the "better" satellites as well as the ones that needed fixing all have shown that the upper atmosphere has been warming more than the UAH stooge and company have been claiming for the past 15 years. Notice how he has quieted down significantly?
    I think even he realizes that Is Happening.

    As I noted numerous times here, the data will be better, and more conclusive as we go along.

    If you go waaaay back, it was all "oh, there isn't any warming at all, that is made up", then after almost a decade more warming, its "humans aren't the cause" as if some other process has been adding CO2 to the atmosphere and making it warm.

    LOL Wild Cobra's "its the sun, have you thought about the sun, huh, huh?"

  17. #3617
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    94,654
    Earth May Be Close to 'Threshold of Catastrophe'

    The amount of carbon dioxide that humans will have released into the atmosphere by 2100 may be enough to trigger a sixth mass extinction,

    The huge e in CO2 levels over the past century may put the world dangerously close to a "threshold of catastrophe," after which environmental instability and mass die-offs become inevitable,

    https://www.livescience.com/60578-si...gn=20171002-ls



  18. #3618
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Post Count
    11,676

  19. #3619
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    94,654
    As if facts made the slightest difference to you AGW denying assholes

    September sets alarming global temperature record and negates a favorite denier talking point

    It was also the most active month on record for North Atlantic hurricanes.

    September 2017 smashed multiple climate records, alarming scientists and further negating a favorite talking point of climate science deniers.
    First and foremost, last month was the hottest September ever recorded in the four decades of satellite data analyzed by the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH).

    Equally amazing, “of the 20 warmest monthly global average temperatures in the satellite record, only September 2017 was not during an El Niño,” reports Dr. John Christy, director of UAH’s Earth System Science Center — and an infamous climate science misinformer.

    when temperature records are set in the absence of an El Niño, it is another sign that the underlying human-caused global warming trend is stronger than ever.

    the last time the record for the hottest September was set in a year without an El Nino was 2013 — and that record was a stunning 0.58°F (0.32°C) lower.

    It’s especially remarkable to see these records in the UAH satellite data. Christy, along with his UAH colleague Roy Spencer, famously screwed up the satellite temperature measurements of the troposphere for decades (see chart below). Indeed they consistently underestimated global warming:

    This more than decade-long series of miscalculations helped create one of the most enduring myths among climate science deniers: that the satellite data didn’t show the global warming that the surface temperature data did.

    Even now, one of the favorite (false) talking points of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and his fellow climate science deniers is that “satellites find no warming since 1998,”

    which replaced the “there’s been no warming since 1998” talking point after that one fell apart when 2014 became the hottest year on record  —

    and again when 2015 blew away the 2014 record.

    And then again when 2016 topped 2015.

    https://thinkprogress.org/september-...-488cfe1703f9/




  20. #3620
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    As if facts made the slightest difference to you AGW denying assholes

    September sets alarming global temperature record and negates a favorite denier talking point

    It was also the most active month on record for North Atlantic hurricanes.

    September 2017 smashed multiple climate records, alarming scientists and further negating a favorite talking point of climate science deniers.
    First and foremost, last month was the hottest September ever recorded in the four decades of satellite data analyzed by the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH).

    Equally amazing, “of the 20 warmest monthly global average temperatures in the satellite record, only September 2017 was not during an El Niño,” reports Dr. John Christy, director of UAH’s Earth System Science Center — and an infamous climate science misinformer.

    when temperature records are set in the absence of an El Niño, it is another sign that the underlying human-caused global warming trend is stronger than ever.

    the last time the record for the hottest September was set in a year without an El Nino was 2013 — and that record was a stunning 0.58°F (0.32°C) lower.

    It’s especially remarkable to see these records in the UAH satellite data. Christy, along with his UAH colleague Roy Spencer, famously screwed up the satellite temperature measurements of the troposphere for decades (see chart below). Indeed they consistently underestimated global warming:

    This more than decade-long series of miscalculations helped create one of the most enduring myths among climate science deniers: that the satellite data didn’t show the global warming that the surface temperature data did.

    Even now, one of the favorite (false) talking points of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and his fellow climate science deniers is that “satellites find no warming since 1998,”

    which replaced the “there’s been no warming since 1998” talking point after that one fell apart when 2014 became the hottest year on record  —

    and again when 2015 blew away the 2014 record.

    And then again when 2016 topped 2015.

    https://thinkprogress.org/september-...-488cfe1703f9/



    LOL...

    The pundits keep spinning and spinning and spinning.

    There were worse storm years than these.

    B- fooled again...

  21. #3621
    The Boognish FuzzyLumpkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    19,255
    As weather-related damages increase, these
    costs fall on insurers, businesses, and consumers.
    The world’s five largest natural catastrophes
    ranked by insured losses in 2012 all occurred
    in the United States, including Hurricane
    Sandy, drought in the West, and various storms
    and tornadoes, according to Munich Re. The
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
    (NOAA) recorded 80 U.S. weather/climate
    events that each had losses exceeding $1
    billion between 2004 and 2013, compared with
    only 46 events in the previous decade.
    Here is NOAA’s breakdown of weatherrelated
    events:
    n The western U.S. has experienced hotter and
    drier temperatures over the past decade,
    which has led to more wildfires and crop
    failures. There were 14 drought and wildfire
    events where each loss exceeded $1 billion
    in 2004-2013, according to NOAA data,
    compared with 10 similar events between
    1994 and 2003.
    n Damage from winter storms and freezes,
    which generally hit the eastern half of the
    United States, fell over the past decade.
    NOAA reported three winter storm and
    freeze events where losses exceeded $1 billion
    between 2004 and 2013, compared with
    seven similar events in 1994-2003.
    n Water damage has surged over the past
    10 years, in large part caused by increased
    hurricane activity. NOAA reported 23 flood
    and hurricane events with losses exceeding
    $1 billion between 2004 and 2013, compared
    with 16 from 1994-2003.
    n The biggest increase in damage from
    weather events over the past decade came
    from severe storms, which NOAA classifies
    as tornadoes, hail storms, severe thunderstorms,
    derechos, and flash floods. There
    were 40 such events with losses exceeding $1
    billion from 2004-2013, compared with 13
    between 1994 and 2003.5

    http://actuariesclimateindex.org/home/

    Actuaries continue to make WC look like a fool.

  22. #3622
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Can Fuzzy Wuzzy say "cyclical?"

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy understand how a growing population density and inflation makes such things more and more costly per square mile as time progresses?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy realize this is only the third worse storm season in US history based on barometric pressures and speeds that hit land?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy realize that the satellite record is too short and inaccurate before 1992?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy understand storm sewer capacity and how the first several inches of precipitation is no longer absorbed by the ground, due to land use changes?

  23. #3623
    The Boognish FuzzyLumpkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    19,255
    Can Fuzzy Wuzzy say "cyclical?"

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy understand how a growing population density and inflation makes such things more and more costly per square mile as time progresses?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy realize this is only the third worse storm season in US history based on barometric pressures and speeds that hit land?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy realize that the satellite record is too short and inaccurate before 1992?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy understand storm sewer capacity and how the first several inches of precipitation is no longer absorbed by the ground, due to land use changes?
    These are new how about you prove any of it. Your word is around here. Once you prove your assertions then I will consider them otherwise they will be discarded.

  24. #3624
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    These are new how about you prove any of it. Your word is around here. Once you prove your assertions then I will consider them otherwise they will be discarded.
    How about proving things were not relatively worse in the past, like the 30's?

    Notice these claims you post are since the 90's...

    What are you such a re Fuzzy Wuzzy?

  25. #3625
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    49,258
    Can Fuzzy Wuzzy say "cyclical?"

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy understand how a growing population density and inflation makes such things more and more costly per square mile as time progresses?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy realize this is only the third worse storm season in US history based on barometric pressures and speeds that hit land?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy realize that the satellite record is too short and inaccurate before 1992?

    Does Fuzzy Wuzzy understand storm sewer capacity and how the first several inches of precipitation is no longer absorbed by the ground, due to land use changes?
    "cyclical"

    What is driving the current warming cycle? Specifically.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •