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.
"The U.S. is currently going through an extended period of hurricane inactivity, with no major hurricanes having made landfall in the last 11 years. As a result, hurricanes have not received the media attention they deserve.
Though 2015 was a quiet year in the North Atlantic, from a worldwide perspective, last year’s tropical storm season was the most intense in recorded history."
He then cites thusly:
"Here are just a few of the records set by last year’s tropical storms. Tropical storm records set in 2015:
Most major storms: Last year, the world saw 30major storms (category 3 or higher), far above the previous record of 23, set in 2004.
Most powerful storm: Hurricane Patricia, which formed off the coast of Mexico last October, had sustained wind speeds that peaked at 215 mph, faster than any tropical storm ever recorded.
2 major storms in the Arabian Sea: The Arabian Sea, where tropical storms are uncommon due to its dry and windy climate, had 2 major cyclones last year. Before last year, only 6 major cyclones had ever been recorded in the Arabian Sea.
Easternmost hurricane: In September of last year, Hurricane Fred struck Cabo Verde, traveling further east in the Atlantic than any previous hurricane.
Latest hurricane: Though technically part of the 2016 season, hurricane Alex became only the second ever documented January hurricane. Alex attained hurricane status on 1/14/2016, 10 days later than the previous January hurricane, which became a hurricane on 1/4/1938.
You can make jokes, but it is a HUGE financial burden. We also have Emissions Trading there as well, so there are more costs to doing business. Remember, the Democrats pushing Cap, and Trade? (Cap, and Tax). Well that's what it is. More Taxes.
I think those taxes should be levied on the fossil fuel companies, not the end user. I also think tax credits should be emphasized for renewable sources. I know that Republicans won't dare try and tax the energy companies that provide them with their campaign cash. Many democrats won't either.
That is the entire goal of the Man Made Climate Change movement. They had to change the name from Global Warming because the Earth has actually been cooling...
The earth has been cooling? Are you sure?
If you look carefully at the data, a trend line drawn from 1980 to 2017 is steeper than the long-term average. Global warming is ramping up.
Now look at the medium term trend of CO2
The correlation between rising temperatures and rising CO2 is obvious.
I think those taxes should be levied on the fossil fuel companies, not the end user. I also think tax credits should be emphasized for renewable sources. I know that Republicans won't dare try and tax the energy companies that provide them with their campaign cash. Many democrats won't either.
All taxes like these get passed through to the consumer, because corporations are beholden to their stock holder to generate a target Gross Margin, and hopefully increases in stock value, dividends, etc. This is true for any costs like tax, fee, surcharge, etc.
I think those taxes should be levied on the fossil fuel companies, not the end user. I also think tax credits should be emphasized for renewable sources. I know that Republicans won't dare try and tax the energy companies that provide them with their campaign cash. Many democrats won't either.
You do realize any taxes levied on a corporation end up being paid by the end user? Or, are you one of those ignorant la-la land dwellers who think corporations/business' actually pay taxes?
We have energy sources available right now that could be put into play right now that would lower such emissions but neither party is pushing them.
Natural Gas anyone? It's plentiful, tech is already done and engines/delivery systems already exist.
"This is the inescapable conclusion of a landmark paper, published in Nature Geoscience, which finally admits that the computer models have overstated the impact of carbon dioxide on climate and that the planet is warming more slowly than predicted."
Honestly, if you are going to CNN or Brietbart for science information you have already revealed bias seeking behavior which is antithetical to science. A link to the original paper devoid of the partisan pundit spin layered on top of it would be starting from a more intellectually viable position.
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.
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.
