U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-07-2013, 12:24 PM
 
200 posts, read 260,287 times
Reputation: 80

Advertisements

I don't buy into "climate change" anymore. At first, I accepted it. Then, I grew weary. Now, I reject it. 4 of the last 5 winters have been colder than average and isn't the climate always changing? Glaciers are melting in some places but they are growing in others. Besides that, we're just in the "warm" phase in between hundreds if not thousands of ice ages that have come and will come again. The next one is, from what I heard, on schedule to peak in about 80,000 years.
Rate this post positively

 
Old 04-07-2013, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Earth Wanderer, longing for the stars.
12,408 posts, read 18,198,456 times
Reputation: 8884
director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies and a controversial and highly vocal voice of alarm about the planet’s changing climate, will retire as the director of the space institute . . .

NASA top climate scientist James Hansen to retire from Goddard Institute, sue gov

Hansen will step down from his $180,000 a year position to join a number of lawsuits challenging the federal and state governments for their failure to police industry over man’s effect on the climate, the New York Times reported.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 04-07-2013, 04:05 PM
 
13,056 posts, read 12,475,703 times
Reputation: 2613
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldengrain View Post
director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies and a controversial and highly vocal voice of alarm about the planet’s changing climate, will retire as the director of the space institute . . .

NASA top climate scientist James Hansen to retire from Goddard Institute, sue gov

Hansen will step down from his $180,000 a year position to join a number of lawsuits challenging the federal and state governments for their failure to police industry over man’s effect on the climate, the New York Times reported.
He is an activist, not a scientist. Always has been.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 04-07-2013, 08:08 PM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,397,978 times
Reputation: 2903
Quote:
Originally Posted by lobsta View Post
I don't buy into "climate change" anymore. At first, I accepted it. Then, I grew weary. Now, I reject it. 4 of the last 5 winters have been colder than average and isn't the climate always changing? Glaciers are melting in some places but they are growing in others. Besides that, we're just in the "warm" phase in between hundreds if not thousands of ice ages that have come and will come again. The next one is, from what I heard, on schedule to peak in about 80,000 years.
Here we go again! The layman's I-know-science-just-because-I-do.

"Brrrr! The weather man said it's going to be cold out tomorrow! There's proof there's no global warming, for sure for sure!"

OMFG. lol
Rate this post positively
 
Old 04-07-2013, 09:19 PM
 
Location: Earth Wanderer, longing for the stars.
12,408 posts, read 18,198,456 times
Reputation: 8884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
He is an activist, not a scientist. Always has been.
That's your opinion only. Most of the world thinks he's a scientist. I wonder how he fooled all of them and only you have the truth. It must be a heavy burden to go through life with.

I applaud the man for his lawsuit. The government should be sued for failure to do its duty in this matter. He quit because a government employee cannot sue the government.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 04-07-2013, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Earth Wanderer, longing for the stars.
12,408 posts, read 18,198,456 times
Reputation: 8884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua View Post
Here we go again! The layman's I-know-science-just-because-I-do.

"Brrrr! The weather man said it's going to be cold out tomorrow! There's proof there's no global warming, for sure for sure!"

OMFG. lol
Yes. I sometimes watch tv news and the station compares, in their weather presentation, highs and lows for the same month of this and last years. The station must insist on this because the person presenting the comparison says he doesn't know what that's supposed to mean. It's really meaningless data.

It doesn't take more than a few functioning brain cells to realize that we are talking about trends that must be plotted for centuries and that averages or means should be used.

In fact, the problem with the government is that it drags its feet and just caves to pressures by big business. In some respects it DOES recognize that fossil fuels are contributing to climate change because of the increased requirements on fuel efficiency for automobiles. The problem is, it's perhaps too little, too late. Look at all the electric and hybrid cars being sold now. They certainly are far from perfection, but it is the right direction. Look, also, at all the state governments that are subsidizing alternate energy in our homes. At least, when I look around my community, I see solar panels on poles in the streets and on rooftops.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 04-08-2013, 08:16 AM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,397,978 times
Reputation: 2903
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldengrain View Post
Yes. I sometimes watch tv news and the station compares, in their weather presentation, highs and lows for the same month of this and last years. The station must insist on this because the person presenting the comparison says he doesn't know what that's supposed to mean. It's really meaningless data.

It doesn't take more than a few functioning brain cells to realize that we are talking about trends that must be plotted for centuries and that averages or means should be used.

In fact, the problem with the government is that it drags its feet and just caves to pressures by big business. In some respects it DOES recognize that fossil fuels are contributing to climate change because of the increased requirements on fuel efficiency for automobiles. The problem is, it's perhaps too little, too late. Look at all the electric and hybrid cars being sold now. They certainly are far from perfection, but it is the right direction. Look, also, at all the state governments that are subsidizing alternate energy in our homes. At least, when I look around my community, I see solar panels on poles in the streets and on rooftops.
You're right. TV weather channels and weather reporters (who are generally not climatologists) encourage the misconception that global warming is associated with the daily weather for the day because the weather report is 99.99% entertainment, and the rest is a prediction of tomorrow's weather. It's funny and it's not. It's funny because it's so incredibly stupid and false - a sort of Saturday Nite Live. It's not funny because the uneducated actually believe global warming can be determined by listening to the local weatherman, so they turn on the weather report, see coolness predicted, and voila! No global warming! They think that's how global warming is measured scientifically. It's infantile and ignorant, but what's scarier is that lots of uneducated individuals are actually believing the TV weatherman provides scientific proof of something. And of course this is all promoted by the right wing, who spends millions upon millions to confuse the uneducated further because it so conveniently suits their laissez-faire/profit-motive goal to have people deny science through telling them that the local TV weatherman's weather report is a denial of global warming. Witchdoctor "science."

It is a step in the right direction that it's being recognized that fossil fuels are contributing to climate change. What I see as a problem in this country (and of course, other countries are also a problem now, such as China), is the sprawl. The sprawl creates the need for cars and vehicles. Having a vehicle in the U.S. is not a luxury. It's a need. Can't work without it, can't purchase food without it, can't function without it, because of sprawl. I see sprawl as the biggest problem the U.S. has right now. We can do all kinds of things, make cars more fuel-efficient, change the fuel we use, etc., but until we get sprawl under some sort of control, our country will remain a ridiculous place with regard to living, as living here means everything being distant. The only exceptions (NY, etc.) are few.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 04-08-2013, 08:27 AM
 
Location: Earth Wanderer, longing for the stars.
12,408 posts, read 18,198,456 times
Reputation: 8884
An interesting thing that I read, regarding sprawl, is now that cities are getting safer, seniors are preferring to retire there rather than in out of the way villages. They prefer that medical and entertainment and shopping facilities be close by.

It may be that safer cities will attract those in the burbs back again over time.

I take issue with population growth, too, but I guess that is an impossible topic for a lot of people.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 04-08-2013, 09:27 AM
 
2,693 posts, read 874,715 times
Reputation: 1031
Why enforce AB 32 when new studies show no global warming?

NASA report

A new NASA report reveals, “NASA’s Langley Research Center has collated data proving that ‘greenhouse gases’ actually block up to 95 percent of harmful solar rays from reaching our planet, thus reducing the heating impact of the sun.” This revelation debunks the greenhouse gas (GHG) theory about pesky carbon dioxide (CO2) trapping heat in the earth’s atmosphere, causing the planet to warm.

Why enforce AB 32 when new studies show no global warming?
Rate this post positively
 
Old 04-08-2013, 09:32 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,232 posts, read 17,111,829 times
Reputation: 4584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan10 View Post
Why enforce AB 32 when new studies show no global warming?

NASA report

A new NASA report reveals, “NASA’s Langley Research Center has collated data proving that ‘greenhouse gases’ actually block up to 95 percent of harmful solar rays from reaching our planet, thus reducing the heating impact of the sun.” This revelation debunks the greenhouse gas (GHG) theory about pesky carbon dioxide (CO2) trapping heat in the earth’s atmosphere, causing the planet to warm.

Why enforce AB 32 when new studies show no global warming?
What, the flat earthers referencing anything NASA, even incorrectly? Wonders never cease.
Rate this post positively
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:52 AM.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top