Global Warming Thread for All GW Posts (regulations, cleaner, plants)

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by shelby93

Normander-

CHi Towns accusations of you being a 'paid shill' for the energy industrial complex are unproven-

You make all the 'classic' denier viewpoints however- many refute the data and information as collected by legitimate scientific organizations such as NASA, NOAA, EPA, The National Academy of Sciences, and even the maligned IPCC- plus many prestigious Universities.

Not to mention Nomander refuses to just clarify outright he (that is just my personal opinion, based on the argumentative factor) isn't a paid shill.

Nomander, if you aren't receiving any financial compensation, just say so.

But you're here, in a discussion on global warming, whining about how cruelly you are being mistreated. Puh-leeze.

How many times have you promised you're done with me/this folder?

Yet you keep coming back, following a discredited modus operandi.

Unfortunately, it is of course true Exxon and other mega-business are funding denier activities.

Facts are facts.

And with climate change, the fact is there are hundreds of pieces of independently collected data which support larger conclusions.

Human activities leave fingerprints on the environment - beating one's head into the wall over one set of them when there are millions is an exercise in futility.

And to get to the point - there is NO SCIENTIFIC DEBATE about "whether" climate change is real, or the earth is warming, and anyone who suggests there is is living in a state of disbelief.

This is the key point here - and anyone who suggests otherwise has no interest in science - they are preoccupied with the politics/$$$.

[Nomander]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Not to mention Nomander refuses to just clarify outright he (that is just my personal opinion, based on the argumentative factor) isn't a paid shill.

Nomander, if you aren't receiving any financial compensation, just say so.

No I am not. The fact that you make it such a focus is silly and an evasion of the discussions we were having. Though it is not surprising that you would base your "opinion" on something as silly as the fact that a person continues to argue against you. If that is your reasoning pattern, then it is not a surprise that you keep evading the details of the discussion.

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

But you're here, in a discussion on global warming, whining about how cruelly you are being mistreated. Puh-leeze.

No, I was here discussing the science. You were here making unfounded accusations as well as pointless sexist remarks in order to attack personally. These are the facts, something you tend to lack in these discussion.

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

How many times have you promised you're done with me/this folder?

Done with you? None. Taking a break? Once. I placed another on ignore a while ago, but have responded some to them from time to time. Maybe if you spent more time on the actual discussion rather than silly things such as this, you might not look foolish to everyone here. Or do you have another sexist remark to make? Maybe you would like to call me denier again? Any other little irrelevant accusations and name calling you would care to get off your chest? Knock yourself out, its doing wonders for your position.

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Yet you keep coming back, following a discredited modus operandi.

You keep making claims, yet fail to support them. You are simply spouting off foolish claims and I think people see you for what you really are. Just an emotional person attached to an issue that is deathly afraid they might not be right in their position and so lashes out at others who do not conform to their opinion. I feel sorry for you, I really do.

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Unfortunately, it is of course true Exxon and other mega-business are funding denier activities.

Sure Exxon funds skeptical research, just as they fund research that tends to support AGW. Not a surprise really, though calling people names (deniers) in order to insult is something I would expect from a child, not someone who proclaims themselves to be educated and rational.

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Facts are facts.

And with climate change, the fact is there are hundreds of pieces of independently collected data which support larger conclusions.

And some of those may be valid, some not. Just as there are "hundreds" of independently collected data which contest those claims. As for supporting larger conclusions. Conclusions in science are not simply gathering enough to where you can lay claim. It doesn't work that way. Science is a process of proving something wrong, not a pursuit of trying to prove it right, yet tell me... which one do you see your agencies applying?

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Human activities leave fingerprints on the environment - beating one's head into the wall over one set of them when there are millions is an exercise in futility.

Look up logical fallacies, you really use them consistently. In science, it doesn't matter if you have bunch of data that supports you, it only takes one failure of support to bring down your entire argument. That is how it works. If your hypothesis fails and does not attend its failures, then it fails entirely. /shrug

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

And to get to the point - there is NO SCIENTIFIC DEBATE about "whether" climate change is real, or the earth is warming, and anyone who suggests there is is living in a state of disbelief.

Yep, climate changes. The earth has warmed, never argued that. I argued when and where as well as its cause. You keep trying to change the argument, to suggest I am arguing something as such. I am not. I argue key points which by the way are the key foundations to your position. I have been trying to explain the details, but unfortunately you have been too busy pointing fingers and making unfounded assumptions about ones motive. Maybe actually enter the discussion on the details sometime rather than dismissing it.

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

This is the key point here - and anyone who suggests otherwise has no interest in science - they are preoccupied with the politics/$$$.

The key point is the science itself. So far, your response have been to make accusations of motive, insult with sexist remarks and name calling (denier) and completely ignore any of the details of the discussion.

I don't care what your motives are honestly. It doesn't change the facts of the science. I don't care what your sex is, I don't care what your opinion is, I honestly do not care about you in the slightest.

I do care that you back your arguments up with proper logical reasoning and support. I do care when you evade information, name call, attack motive, and act nasty as you do. Your responses have been obnoxious and emotional and they have had an effect on your ability to properly discuss the issue.

/shrug

[shelby93]

Something of Interest From Atlantic Magazine

After my recent column on how big business is coming together to defend global warming legislation in California, I was overwhelmed by the number of notes I received asking about the state of the global warming debate. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is in shambles, the U.S. Senate is stymied, and the public is losing confidence that climate change is real. But this past summer's crazy weather may be changing some minds.


read on.......Summer's Officially Over: What Did It Show Us About Climate Change? - Adam Werbach - Business - The Atlantic

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by shelby93

Something of Interest From Atlantic Magazine

After my recent column on how big business is coming together to defend global warming legislation in California, I was overwhelmed by the number of notes I received asking about the state of the global warming debate. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is in shambles, the U.S. Senate is stymied, and the public is losing confidence that climate change is real. But this past summer's crazy weather may be changing some minds.


read on.......Summer's Officially Over: What Did It Show Us About Climate Change? - Adam Werbach - Business - The Atlantic

And here, much to my delight as a cool weather fan, we have had one of the coolest summers on record.

Bay Area Suffers Through Record Cold Summer - News Story - KTVU San Francisco

Forget that "suffers" description - it has been wonderful. Next year the East may well be cool and we'll swelter - who knows? These things happen - always have and always will. That's why weather reporters have jobs.

[Stephen1110]

Regardless of whether Global warming is real or not, both sides can benefit

[Nomander]

Originally Posted by CrownVic95

And here, much to my delight as a cool weather fan, we have had one of the coolest summers on record.

Bay Area Suffers Through Record Cold Summer - News Story - KTVU San Francisco

Forget that "suffers" description - it has been wonderful. Next year the East may well be cool and we'll swelter - who knows? These things happen - always have and always will. That's why weather reporters have jobs.

Yes, there were many records in cooling as you mention. There were some interesting heat events (Russia with its blocking high was certainly an interesting event of occurrence, though the process of such changes are not abnormal for that region, the extent of this one was). The result of such is not directly attributed to "global warming" though as they can not explain the occurrence of the blocking high. Sure, there are "beliefs" as to such occurrence as Gavin Schmidt seems to believe that these events will increase and the cooling events of opposite will decrease over time. His assumption doesn't seem to be supported by the events.

My issue is that they don't understand why, yet they write their reports with certainty and flamboyance by selecting wording that is inappropriate for such. Using descriptions such as “From the freezer to the stove” and “as if orchestrated by an overzealous conductor responding to nature’s seasonal cycle” have really no place in the reports of a scientific establishment.

The fact is, they do not know. That is fine, I can accept them guessing at such and then trying to see if that guess holds up, but as we see, maybe more so due to the media's exaggeration, that these guesses tend to get placed into the position of "fact" rather than explained as simple assumptions of occurrence and cause.

I also find it disingenuous that we focus on these events as if they are completely out of place. The 1923-24 heat wave in the Australia is known as the longest heat wave recorded at a 160 days at 100 degrees. Though the focus tends to be strongly on that of 1979 and later. While I understand such due to satellite records becoming available, to ignore previous record, especially when they are of record nature is to advantageous to a position. For instance, the Arctic is a good example where past ice loss and conditions are recorded historically to which show the conditions to be actually worse than they are today.

Honestly, I wish the media and the agenda drivers would simply leave the science alone, let them drop out of the spotlight so they can actually get some work done rather than constantly grooming themselves for an appearance to the public. It reminds me of a circus at times.

[Nomander]

Originally Posted by Stephen1110

Regardless of whether Global warming is real or not, both sides can benefit

Please explain.

[shelby93]

Update: 21 September 2010
Although ice extent appeared to reach a minimum on September 10, rising afterward for three straight days, it has subsequently declined even further. NSIDC scientists are closely monitoring the ice extent and will provide another update on the data, as conditions develop.
Our season-end announcement in October will provide the final numbers for the minimum extent, as well as the monthly data for September, which scientists use for establishing long-term trends.



Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

[Nomander]

Originally Posted by shelby93

Update: 21 September 2010
Although ice extent appeared to reach a minimum on September 10, rising afterward for three straight days, it has subsequently declined even further. NSIDC scientists are closely monitoring the ice extent and will provide another update on the data, as conditions develop.
Our season-end announcement in October will provide the final numbers for the minimum extent, as well as the monthly data for September, which scientists use for establishing long-term trends.



Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/plot.csv

Originally Posted by 2010

09,01,2010,5332344
09,02,2010,5304219
09,03,2010,5245625
09,04,2010,5192188
09,05,2010,5136094
09,06,2010,5093281
09,07,2010,5027188
09,08,2010,4989375
09,09,2010,4972656
09,10,2010,4952813
09,11,2010,4986406
09,12,2010,5005000
09,13,2010,5008750
09,14,2010,4998594
09,15,2010,4948438
09,16,2010,4890938
09,17,2010,4842031
09,18,2010,4813594
09,19,2010,4841563
09,20,2010,4878281
09,21,2010,4915313
09,22,2010,4983594
09,23,2010,-9999 (means no data for obvious reasons)
09,24,2010,-9999
09,25,2010,-9999
09,26,2010,-9999
09,27,2010,-9999
09,28,2010,-9999
09,29,2010,-9999
09,30,2010,-9999

Red is a trend of loss in extent. Blue is a gain in extent.

This is the kind of garbage I am talking about. Your update is for the 21'st, the 3rd day of growth after the 5 day loss we had after the 13th.

So what do they do? They claim a loss, but even after knowing we have a growth again of almost as many days as the loss, they focus on the loss and do not inform people of the growth.

If the loss of 5 days we had is so dang important, then why is not the gain we had important as well? Could it be that they want to keep people thinking there is a dramatic shift?

Also, another thing that irritates me is that they always talk about "weather is not climate" and that small fluctuation mean nothing, but here they are doing exactly that! If the loss of 5 days is so important, why wasn't the sudden turn on the 9th which suggested an early turn important?

This sort of media style reporting from them is ridiculous.

NSIDC scientists are closely monitoring the ice extent and will provide another update on the data, as conditions develop.

Stay tuned folks, the ice is melting and scientists are closely watching it!

Is this occurrence unique though? Lets see...

From the same link above you can check from 2002 on, though there is no data for that same date in 2002, so I will show you 2003 on.

Originally Posted by 2003

09,01,2003,6218125
09,02,2003,6217500
09,03,2003,6198906
09,04,2003,6148750
09,05,2003,6116406
09,06,2003,6113750
09,07,2003,6104375
09,08,2003,6103750
09,09,2003,6086406
09,10,2003,6060469
09,11,2003,6041250
09,12,2003,6105625
09,13,2003,6180313
09,14,2003,6146563
09,15,2003,6049844
09,16,2003,6041875
09,17,2003,6033281
09,18,2003,6032031
09,19,2003,6088906
09,20,2003,6122656
09,21,2003,6085469
09,22,2003,6047031
09,23,2003,6080469
09,24,2003,6101719
09,25,2003,6137031
09,26,2003,6152813
09,27,2003,6156875
09,28,2003,6198125
09,29,2003,6276094
09,30,2003,6347656

Originally Posted by 2004

09,01,2004,5893594
09,02,2004,5880000
09,03,2004,5887031
09,04,2004,5899531
09,05,2004,5903125
09,06,2004,5887344
09,07,2004,5856563
09,08,2004,5839219
09,09,2004,5835313
09,10,2004,5825000
09,11,2004,5784688
09,12,2004,5806719
09,13,2004,5854375
09,14,2004,5901094
09,15,2004,5912188
09,16,2004,5882813
09,17,2004,5821250
09,18,2004,5809688
09,19,2004,5808750
09,20,2004,5818906
09,21,2004,5866719
09,22,2004,5925625
09,23,2004,5994688
09,24,2004,6107188
09,25,2004,6169531
09,26,2004,6204375
09,27,2004,6257031
09,28,2004,6315781
09,29,2004,6378750
09,30,2004,6440156

Originally Posted by 2005

09,01,2005,5649531
09,02,2005,5670469
09,03,2005,5689375
09,04,2005,5682500
09,05,2005,5670625
09,06,2005,5668438
09,07,2005,5657031
09,08,2005,5642656
09,09,2005,5628281
09,10,2005,5599844
09,11,2005,5581875
09,12,2005,5545000
09,13,2005,5506563
09,14,2005,5522344
09,15,2005,5492500
09,16,2005,5447656
09,17,2005,5422344
09,18,2005,5385156
09,19,2005,5368438
09,20,2005,5345156
09,21,2005,5315625
09,22,2005,5315156
09,23,2005,5335156
09,24,2005,5377969
09,25,2005,5407656
09,26,2005,5460781
09,27,2005,5524375
09,28,2005,5581406
09,29,2005,5656875
09,30,2005,5752031

Originally Posted by 2006

09,01,2006,5993438
09,02,2006,5977813
09,03,2006,5958125
09,04,2006,5935313
09,05,2006,5934531
09,06,2006,5918438
09,07,2006,5921875
09,08,2006,5935781
09,09,2006,5936094
09,10,2006,5926094
09,11,2006,5896719
09,12,2006,5864219
09,13,2006,5814063
09,14,2006,5781719
09,15,2006,5794063
09,16,2006,5806094
09,17,2006,5828281
09,18,2006,5874063
09,19,2006,5892500
09,20,2006,5846875
09,21,2006,5847656
09,22,2006,5851406
09,23,2006,5883281
09,24,2006,5972188
09,25,2006,6036719
09,26,2006,6039844
09,27,2006,6016094
09,28,2006,5973906
09,29,2006,5959219
09,30,2006,5981719

Originally Posted by 2007

09,01,2007,4610938
09,02,2007,4617031
09,03,2007,4580000
09,04,2007,4528125
09,05,2007,4484531
09,06,2007,4447031
09,07,2007,4436719
09,08,2007,4413438
09,09,2007,4399531
09,10,2007,4367188
09,11,2007,4343438
09,12,2007,4327969
09,13,2007,4323750
09,14,2007,4291250
09,15,2007,4267813
09,16,2007,4267656
09,17,2007,4268750
09,18,2007,4281406
09,19,2007,4296250
09,20,2007,4310313
09,21,2007,4284531
09,22,2007,4276719
09,23,2007,4267344
09,24,2007,4254531
09,25,2007,4265000
09,26,2007,4297813
09,27,2007,4372188
09,28,2007,4441719
09,29,2007,4499688
09,30,2007,4592969

Originally Posted by 2008

09,01,2008,4957656
09,02,2008,4924219
09,03,2008,4927031
09,04,2008,4868906
09,05,2008,4825625
09,06,2008,4808281
09,07,2008,4739844
09,08,2008,4715469
09,09,2008,4707813
09,10,2008,4729688
09,11,2008,4751563
09,12,2008,4745156
09,13,2008,4742344
09,14,2008,4747188
09,15,2008,4731875
09,16,2008,4726250
09,17,2008,4718594
09,18,2008,4736406
09,19,2008,4745000
09,20,2008,4752500
09,21,2008,4773750
09,22,2008,4809219
09,23,2008,4873125
09,24,2008,4878750
09,25,2008,4873750
09,26,2008,4945313
09,27,2008,5003906
09,28,2008,5036406
09,29,2008,5095156
09,30,2008,5220313

Originally Posted by 2009

09,01,2009,5423750
09,02,2009,5398281
09,03,2009,5379844
09,04,2009,5387969
09,05,2009,5363438
09,06,2009,5345156
09,07,2009,5328906
09,08,2009,5330469
09,09,2009,5315938
09,10,2009,5295313
09,11,2009,5278594
09,12,2009,5259375
09,13,2009,5249844
09,14,2009,5276563
09,15,2009,5301094
09,16,2009,5291094
09,17,2009,5326094
09,18,2009,5348438
09,19,2009,5358594
09,20,2009,5383594
09,21,2009,5401875
09,22,2009,5432813
09,23,2009,5417031
09,24,2009,5408281
09,25,2009,5439688
09,26,2009,5480781
09,27,2009,5516406
09,28,2009,5524375
09,29,2009,5580313
09,30,2009,5639688

Interesting don't you think? Losing ice later in the month is not unprecedented and yet your report seems to imply that it is, that this is a serious update that they need to pay attention to.

Seriously, their utter joy for the arctic melting and there by supporting their position is blatantly obvious.

Honestly, I am getting sick of their politics. If there is short trend of growth, there is silence. If a short trend of a loss occurs, they must inform the public!

Notice that in 2010, the key area they are reporting on has already shown 4 days of growth, yet I see no announcement of such and why would they make an announcement of a loss considering the past records and the normality of loss past mid month between them?

Science? Really? There is no political involvement here? Yeah... umm... sure.

[Stephen1110]

To Nomamder- Read some sections of my essay rough draft

​For the ever growing concern of When folks talk about ever-growing concern about the effects of Global Warming, my question is: who’s concerned?
*
​In the blue shorts we have Muhammad “Let’s Fight Climate Change” Ali and in the red shorts we have Mike “ Global Warming Doesn’t Exist, so Why Act” Tyson. *This can be the battle of the century, but it doesn’t have to be. There is common ground; there are interrelated goals, with shared benefits that can satisfy both sides; thus it can become a draw.
*
​So now your question is, “Do I have to believe in Global Warming, to stop climate change?” *So, you now you’re saying, “We’re all just gonna die if we can’t convince that global warming is real?” Well, take it from me, I believe some effects of Global Warming are inevitable, but it doesn’t mean I have to cross my arms, sit back and accept it. Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is a simple way you can benefit regardless, and that is by retrofitting your home.
*
* * * How about those utility bills? Are they high or low? Lets find out why. Unnecessary and high energy and water usage mirrors supply and demand. Demand for water increases the need for energy. Why? The collection, distribution, and treatment of water require large amounts of energy. Now the demand for energy increases, increasing the need for water in the operation of power plants. So, what happens when supply is low, the cost of energy dramatically increases because demand for it increased. Think of it as a cycle of resource consumption, and at the end of every cycle, it becomes more expensive.
*
* * But how exactly are you benefitting with a simple retrofit? So far, we’ve skimmed the surface, so lets go deeper. Programs like Rising Sun Energy Center offer free services and appliances to help. you take on a simple retrofit. One of their goals in your house is for energy efficiency. So they switch your current old school light bulbs with CFL light bulbs and or switch your old lamps with torchiere lamps. Both of these things consume lower amounts of energy. In this round for energy efficiency, blue shorts now saves 75% more energy, reducing green house gases in the attempt to fight climate change. However, red shorts now uses 75% less energy, in attempt to lower the cost on the utility costs bill, thus saving more money. So who wins? Both sides are happy and regardless of their purpose, they have indirectly benefitted the other side.
*
* * Rising Sun Energy Center also has a goal for water efficiency in your home. To reach this goal, and for the price of nothing but time and an appointment, they install faucet aerators and low-flow showerheads. Both of these things help save water because it lowers reduce the amount of water being used by spreading or limiting the flow of water into little droplets or streams. So in this round of water efficiency, blue shorts is now saving more water, lowering the need for reducing energy use and once again in an attempt to fighting climate change. While the red shorts, are now using less water, and once again saving money on that utility bill. As tedious as it may sound, I have to ask; who’s won this round? Because both sides are not disappointed and have now benefitted the other side twice.
*
​Is there a winner? Doesn’t seem like it. But is this really a fight? I’m going to have to lean towards no. In a nut shell, Rising Sun Energy Center and other similar groups offers free simple retrofits=you save money because you don’t have to buy it; its free= it has its benefits, there’s demand for it; retrofits are in style= more youth jobs=reduced energy and water usage= saving money on utility bills and reduction of greenhouse gases=a fight to stop climate change. Common ground, interrelated goals, and shared benefits are is the reasons why this shouldn’t become a fight. So, doesn’t it make sense for Red Shorts and Blue Shorts to collaborate instead of fighting? Aren’t the reasons above enough to collaborate; it only makes
*