Dog

Climate news

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, jzk said:

Sounds like you don't know.

In the 1950s, they took all the farm land from the landlords and executed 800,000 of them.  Then they started collective farming.  That caused a famine and the death about 30 million more people, give or take 10 million.  

Then, in the late 70s, peasants started allocating land privately, but unofficially.  On these private plots of land, outputs tripled.  The Chinese government found out about it and started permitting others to do it.

That is how China became capitalist.  No more famines in China.  As the rest of the world develops in a similar fashion, hunger will be eliminated there as well.

You make all of these predictions, but the opposite of what you say is happening.  

We are talking fertilizer here, not social change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The altlantic Gulf Stream is at its weakest in 1600 years.    Alarming, since nobody knows quite what it means.   It may have something to do with  the US NE being stuck in winter.

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/slow-motion-ocean-atlantics-circulation-is-weakest-in-1-600-years/

 

In recent years sensors stationed across the North Atlantic have picked up a potentially concerning signal: The grand northward progression of water along North America that moves heat from the tropics toward the Arctic has been sluggish. If that languidness continues and deepens, it could usher in drastic changes in sea level and weather around the ocean basin.

Such concerns had been quelled over the last decade as climate models suggested this branch of the ocean’s circulatory system was not likely to see a rapid slowdown, which would slow any consequences. But two new studies, published Wednesday in the journal Nature, suggest the recent weakening spotted by ocean sensors is not just a short-term blip, as some had thought. Rather, it is part of a longer-term decline that has put the circulation at its weakest state in centuries. The results imply climate models are missing key pieces of the puzzle, and that ill effects could be on their way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No idea if this is climate related or just a weather event, but holy fek - some serious rain in Kauai. I have family with a place there - they sent this link http://m.hawaiinewsnow.com/hawaiinewsnow/db_330510/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=2bc5bRFX

“The rainfall has smashed records on Kauai. Rain gauges on the Garden Isle showed that 27.13 inches of rain fell in Hanalei in the 24-hour period that ended at 7 a.m. Sunday; 8.4 inches fell between 11 p.m. Saturday and 2 a.m. Sunday alone.

Weather Service records dating back to 1905 showed a previous 24-hour record of 12.52 inches, set in March 2012. Hanalei had a record 24 inches in a 48-hour period and 33 inches in 72 hours, also during the same weather event.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Zealand stuns oil industry with offshore drilling ban

Looks like the Kiwi's are setting a good example.    Tip of the hat gents.    Even if we persist in denying our role in climate change, a conservative mindset would demand we hoard a non renewable resource essential for manufacturing tires, gaskets, sails and other critical commodities.  Instead we consume it as fast as possible.      

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I don't hear in this area anymore? How climate change is a big hoax, that we had 3 floods in 3 years with Harvey being the mother of all floods and the other 2 being the 100 year type it's a bit more in your face now.  I drove through a neighborhood today and people are just starting to gut those houses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lark said:

New Zealand stuns oil industry with offshore drilling ban

Looks like the Kiwi's are setting a good example.    Tip of the hat gents.    Even if we persist in denying our role in climate change, a conservative mindset would demand we hoard a non renewable resource essential for manufacturing tires, gaskets, sails and other critical commodities.  Instead we consume it as fast as possible.      

 

There is a difference between hoarding it and not knowing if you have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, d'ranger said:

You know what I don't hear in this area anymore? How climate change is a big hoax, that we had 3 floods in 3 years with Harvey being the mother of all floods and the other 2 being the 100 year type it's a bit more in your face now.  I drove through a neighborhood today and people are just starting to gut those houses. 

Climate chamge is not a hoax. It has changede constantly. "Climate Change" is a political movememt to shame achievers with dubious "settled science" that evolves and backsteps daily. "Climate Change" is a movement that gives a pass to thirdworld countries, repressive comunist regimes and penalizes the cleanest nations on the earth. "Climate Change" is a movement supported by "bought" science charlatans dipping into the govt feeding trough.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gissie said:

There is a difference between hoarding it and not knowing if you have it.

:lol:

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, warbird said:

Climate chamge is not a hoax. It has changede constantly. "Climate Change" is a political movememt to shame achievers with dubious "settled science" that evolves and backsteps daily. "Climate Change" is a movement that gives a pass to thirdworld countries, repressive comunist regimes and penalizes the cleanest nations on the earth. "Climate Change" is a movement supported by "bought" science charlatans dipping into the govt feeding trough.

You are a good little soldier cheerfully repeating the bullshit. Well done.  The rest of us see the climate changing, which we shouldn't as climate change is very slow.  As someone who has spent time on Galveston bay for almost 60 years I have seen very distinct and long lasting changes.  In my lifetime I have witnessed weather events that were not even predicted. It's not political, it is what is happening, your attempts to tie this to some political agenda is seriously fucking sad.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

You are a good little soldier cheerfully repeating the bullshit. Well done.  The rest of us see the climate changing, which we shouldn't as climate change is very slow.  As someone who has spent time on Galveston bay for almost 60 years I have seen very distinct and long lasting changes.  In my lifetime I have witnessed weather events that were not even predicted. It's not political, it is what is happening, your attempts to tie this to some political agenda is seriously fucking sad.

Every fucking swinging dick in history has seen it get colder or warmer in their lifetime. Are you some kind of special?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

You are a good little soldier cheerfully repeating the bullshit. Well done.  The rest of us see the climate changing, which we shouldn't as climate change is very slow.  As someone who has spent time on Galveston bay for almost 60 years I have seen very distinct and long lasting changes.  In my lifetime I have witnessed weather events that were not even predicted. It's not political, it is what is happening, your attempts to tie this to some political agenda is seriously fucking sad.

You are an arrogant prick. You equate your anecdotal evidence as SCIENTIFIC PROOF. What a fuckwad. The very best flawed data suggest a 1 degree fahrenheit delta since you were a swimming sperm. All of our forefathers tales of walking to school in 3 feet of snow were just tales, "uphill both ways" should have clued you the fuck in. I am guessing. Mensa sent you a "declined" letter. Could you read it?

Edited by warbird
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, warbird said:

You are an arrogant prick. You equate your anecdotal evidence as SCIENTIFIC PROOF. What a fuckwad. The very best flawed data suggest a 1 degree fahrenheit delta since you were a swimming sperm. All of our forefathers tales of walking to school in 3 feet of snow were just tales, "uphill both ways" should have clued you the fuck in.

I am an arrogant prick? Of course you can't see the irony of your posts. The really great thing about the forum upgrades is how sooopppeeerr simple it is to put people on ignore. You aren't worth the entertainment factor anymore.  buh bye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

I am an arrogant prick? Of course you can't see the irony of your posts. The really great thing about the forum upgrades is how sooopppeeerr simple it is to put people on ignore. You aren't worth the entertainment factor anymore.  buh bye.

Give me a minus too.

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, warbird said:

Give me a minus too.

Done, as per your request

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, warbird said:

You are an arrogant prick. You equate your anecdotal evidence as SCIENTIFIC PROOF. What a fuckwad. The very best flawed data suggest a 1 degree fahrenheit delta since you were a swimming sperm. All of our forefathers tales of walking to school in 3 feet of snow were just tales, "uphill both ways" should have clued you the fuck in. I am guessing. Mensa sent you a "declined" letter. Could you read it?

The scientific proof was from the DSCVR satellite that was shut down last year, but is thankfully being replaced by the Europeans.  The earth is absorbing energy.  The rest is details.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This just came out.    Obviously a month of contrasts.

“March 2018 was characterized by warmer-than-average conditions across much of the world's surface. However, temperature departures from average varied greatly across the Northern Hemisphere land. Warmer-than-average conditions were present across Alaska, northern and eastern Canada, South America, Africa, Australia and much of Asia. Record warmth was observed across parts of eastern Africa, the Middle East, and southern Asia, which corresponds with the locations that had the most notable warm temperature departures from average (+3.0°C [+5.4°F] or higher) during the month. Near- to cooler-than-average conditions were present across much of the contiguous U.S., southwestern Canada, Europe, and western and northern Russia. Across the oceans, record warmth was observed scattered across all oceans, while cooler-than-average conditions were limited to the North Atlantic Ocean, central and eastern tropical as well as southeastern Pacific Ocean, and across parts of the eastern Indian Ocean. No land or ocean areas experienced record cold temperatures during March 2018.”

 

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201803

9484F35E-E25E-41C2-8758-807B0242AFC2.gif

460A859B-5F94-4805-80CF-184A5601602C.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 7:52 PM, warbird said:

Give me a minus too.

considering what you relentlessly state here regarding this topic, I feel compelled to say that, imo, I think you're either an intellectual midget who can't connect approximately three dots, an asshole, or both. this isn't a political quandary, it's a moral issue, get the fk out the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 8:48 PM, Laker said:

 The earth is absorbing energy.  The rest is details.

that's a good way to put it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 11:48 PM, Laker said:

The scientific proof was from the DSCVR satellite that was shut down last year, but is thankfully being replaced by the Europeans.  The earth is absorbing energy.  The rest is details.

The earth is always either absorbing or emitting energy.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Dog said:

The earth is always either absorbing or emitting energy.

Yep, now it is absorbing it.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dog said:

The earth is always either absorbing or emitting energy.

That does not have any validity from someone with a STEM education.  The earth is always has net absorption of energy or we would be a cold wasteland.  The earth cannot emit (reflect perhaps) energy.  A bit more rigour in your statements is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Laker said:

That does not have any validity from someone with a STEM education.  The earth is always has net absorption of energy or we would be a cold wasteland.  The earth cannot emit (reflect perhaps) energy.  A bit more rigour in your statements is required.

Nonsense, the earth is always emitting energy. Sometimes more than it absorbs, sometimes less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The earth's core is so insulated by the surrounding rock that I can't see it being a significant emitter.  Other than that, you are talking about variations in reflectivity.  Can you name some emitters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Laker said:

The earth's core is so insulated by the surrounding rock that I can't see it being a significant emitter.  Other than that, you are talking about variations in reflectivity.  Can you name some emitters?

No..... the earth receives short wave radiation from the sun and radiates long wave radiation back into space. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

No..... the earth receives short wave radiation from the sun and radiates long wave radiation back into space. 

depending on the wavelength, we get a lot of long wave stuff also.  E=hn, so that the effect of the shorter wavelength is more pronounced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laker said:

depending on the wavelength, we get a lot of long wave stuff also.  E=hn, so that the effect of the shorter wavelength is more pronounced.

Don't discount the amount of information Dog receives from space. Multiply that by some random number and plug that into the  decay factor for Jeeps. Even allowing for the increased smegma variable, it's inevitable. Probably before the heat death of the universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dog is a Disinformation Agent.  Can't workout if it is by design or not.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, random said:

Dog is a Disinformation Agent.  Can't workout if it is by design or not.

Are YOU really that stupid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WarpedBird is a Disinformation Agent, I presume he is really that stupid and is doing it accidentally..

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Behold the coming apocalypse as predicted on and around Earth Day, 1970:

1.      "Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind."  — Harvard biologist George Wald

2.      "We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation." — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner

3.      "Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction." — New York Times editorial

4.      "Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years." — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich

5.      "Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born… [By 1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s."— Paul Ehrlich

6.      "It is already too late to avoid mass starvation," — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day

7.      "Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions…. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine." — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter

8.      "In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half." — Life magazine

9.      "At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it's only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable." — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

10.  "Air pollution...is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone."— Paul Ehrlich

11.  "By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won't be any more crude oil. You'll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill 'er up, buddy,' and he'll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn't any.'" — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

12.  "[One] theory assumes that the earth's cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun's heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born." — Newsweek magazine

13.  "The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age." — Kenneth Watt

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/13-worst-predictions-made-earth-day-1970

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice one Shill-Dog

FreedomWorks was created in 2004 as a merger between Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE) and Empower America. While CSE was founded by the Koch brothers in 1984 as a powerful think tank promoting deregulation and was originally affiliated with Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation (CSEF), Koch do not appear active in FreedomWorks itself. Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation (CSEF) later split off to become Americans for Prosperity. FreedomWorks's 2013 tax forms list Citizens for a Sound Economy as “Dormant,” with FreedomWorks retaining 100% ownership of the organization.  [1]

According to their website, FreedomWorks was founded as Citizens for a Sound Economy in 1984 to “fight for liberty” and since then expanded “from a free-market think tank to a service center for the grassroots freedom movement across the whole country.” [2]

Past FreedomWorks leadership has included former U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey who served as chairman, and Matt Kibbe as President. [3]

FreedomWorks is “one of the main political outfits of the conservative movement and an instrumental force within the tea party,” according to a 2012 article in Mother Jones. In 2009, the investigative magazine also rated FreedomWorks as one of their Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial.” [4], [5]

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

4.      "Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years." — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich

So I guess Melthus isn't right.  Of course he was before the Industrial Revolution really kicked into gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Laker said:

So I guess Melthus isn't right.  Of course he was before the Industrial Revolution really kicked into gear.

He hasn't been right yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, random said:

Nice one Shill-Dog

FreedomWorks was created in 2004 as a merger between Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE) and Empower America. While CSE was founded by the Koch brothers in 1984 as a powerful think tank promoting deregulation and was originally affiliated with Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation (CSEF), Koch do not appear active in FreedomWorks itself. Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation (CSEF) later split off to become Americans for Prosperity. FreedomWorks's 2013 tax forms list Citizens for a Sound Economy as “Dormant,” with FreedomWorks retaining 100% ownership of the organization.  [1]

According to their website, FreedomWorks was founded as Citizens for a Sound Economy in 1984 to “fight for liberty” and since then expanded “from a free-market think tank to a service center for the grassroots freedom movement across the whole country.” [2]

Past FreedomWorks leadership has included former U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey who served as chairman, and Matt Kibbe as President. [3]

FreedomWorks is “one of the main political outfits of the conservative movement and an instrumental force within the tea party,” according to a 2012 article in Mother Jones. In 2009, the investigative magazine also rated FreedomWorks as one of their Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial.” [4], [5]

So, do you believe that because FreedomWorks those predictions were not made?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dog said:

So, do you believe that because FreedomWorks those predictions were not made?

Because they are lying cunts!

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, random said:

Because they are lying cunts!

The earthday people are lying cunts? Or just delusional? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dog said:

He hasn't been right yet.

He was right for about 40 years after he came up with it and the millennias before him.  The "income" of the majority of people was a constant until about 1800 and an increase in technology (ability to feed people) only lead to an increase in population.  The lot of the average man stayed the same. The industrial revolution caused the divergence for a small segment of the population, until recently, to not have the ability to reproduce as quickly as the ability of technology to advance.  One of the indicators of the advance of civilization is that even the worst off have been able to advance their positions at a greater velocity than their ability or desire to reproduce.

We are 300 generations from the introduction of agriculture and decline in the cultures arising from hunter/gatherer needs.  If we look at the societies that are only 3 or 4 generations removed from hunter/gatherer, we can see Malthus coming through strongly.   This is why in our area the First Nations girls are encouraged by the grannies to have their children very early.  Life was brutish and short, but when it is no longer, the cultural processes remain.

What does climate change have to do with this?  I see you have great faith in the ability of the industrial revolution to continue to keep ahead of the game.  By most indications we will run out of fertilizer in the next 150 years.  This will cause change in our ability to feed people.  My libido respects your faith that this process will not have any issues.  My id says that people will continue to act in the same way they have for centuries to change and most people will end up in the same position as the 15 year old First Nations girl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jzk said:

The earthday people are lying cunts? Or just delusional? 

Anybody who listens to lying cunt groups paid to attack science are just lying cunts!  Just like you and Shill-Dog.

It's fucking hilarious how only climate scientists are attacked, all the others seem to be ok.

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dog said:

Behold the coming apocalypse as predicted on and around Earth Day, 1970:

1.      "Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind."  — Harvard biologist George Wald

Unlikely he was right, but since action was taken, impossible to disprove the Wald Thesis.   

2.      "We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation." — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner

I do not disagree.   The time frame is long, but the problems are real.   Water scarcity alone will have significant ramifications over the next century.   

3.      "Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction." — New York Times editorial

Again, the time frame is long past your remaining days, or mine.   The problems are real.  A claim made to justify the commodity price jumps during the Bush Bubble was "a third of the world's known copper supply is in use, a third is available, and a third has been wasted and dumped in landfills."   All resources are finite.      

4.      "Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years." — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich

https://www.worldhunger.org/2015-world-hunger-and-poverty-facts-and-statistics/    161 million children alone are currently malnourished.   Ehrlich was incorrect, starvation kills very few people.   When a population of any species is severely malnourished many die, but they die of other conditions their weakened bodies cannot fight off.   A portion of those dying of malaria, dysentery, pneumonia, etc would have survived with proper nutrition.  The number is unknowable.    A further problem demonstrated by the holocaust is the stunted mental development caused by severe malnutrition.   Even if the children are provided adequate nutrition, their potential and future abilities may be stunted.   

5.      "Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born… [By 1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s."— Paul Ehrlich    Oops

6.      "It is already too late to avoid mass starvation," — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day

7.      "Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions…. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine." — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter

8.      "In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half." — Life magazine   If action hadn't been taken, this likely would have been correct in many parts of the US.    Look at China a couple years ago, before they began to clean up their own act.   

9.      "At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it's only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable." — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

10.  "Air pollution...is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone."— Paul Ehrlich

They got this one absolutely correct, and likely their numbers were low.   Much respiratory disease, from primary lung cancer to COPD to black lung to Asthma is a complication of breathing contaminated air.   These conditions all kill.   

11.  "By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won't be any more crude oil. You'll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill 'er up, buddy,' and he'll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn't any.'" — Ecologist Kenneth Watt 

12.  "[One] theory assumes that the earth's cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun's heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born." — Newsweek magazine

13.  "The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age." — Kenneth Watt

 

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/13-worst-predictions-made-earth-day-1970

You cherry picked 13 failed predictions.    7 of those were clearly wrong.    # 1 was likely wrong.    # 10 was absolutely correct, and you got it wrong even with the crystal ball of hindsight.   #4 was simplistic but likely close to correct.    #2 and #3 did not have a time frame as you list them.   Just because they have not happened yet doesn't mean they are not happening.   I  assume those who were old enough to talk in 1970 were wise enough to make many accurate predictions, but you did not include on this cherry picked list.    Perhaps as many environmental predictions were wrong as financial predictions?   More embarrassing was your failure to realize some of the predictions you mocked came true or would have come true without action.   Also consider these predictions were made with slide rule modeling at best, and mostly by simple observation and extrapolation.   That is far different from modern computer modeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Lark said:

You cherry picked 13 failed predictions.    7 of those were clearly wrong.    # 1 was likely wrong.    # 10 was absolutely correct, and you got it wrong even with the crystal ball of hindsight.   #4 was simplistic but likely close to correct.    #2 and #3 did not have a time frame as you list them.   Just because they have not happened yet doesn't mean they are not happening.   I  assume those who were old enough to talk in 1970 were wise enough to make many accurate predictions, but you did not include on this cherry picked list.    Perhaps as many environmental predictions were wrong as financial predictions?   More embarrassing was your failure to realize some of the predictions you mocked came true or would have come true without action.   Also consider these predictions were made with slide rule modeling at best, and mostly by simple observation and extrapolation.   That is far different from modern computer modeling.

You can nitpick around the edges but the predictions of the 70's are in hindsight abject failures. I was a big fan of Paul Ehrlich and Barry Commoner back in the day, read everything they wrote. The experience made me the skeptic I am today. Prophets of doom all the way to the bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

You can nitpick around the edges but the predictions of the 70's are in hindsight abject failures. I was a big fan of Paul Ehrlich and Barry Commoner back in the day, read everything they wrote. The experience made me the skeptic I am today. Prophets of doom all the way to the bank.

Doesn't matter what the predictions were Shill-Dog. the numbers are in, the climate is changing while you yap shit.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skeptics should spend a few days visiting all the flooded areas in SE Texas.  The toll it has taken will be many years in the repairing, and this for an event that couldn't happen.  This area had 2 100 year floods a year apart followed by a 500 year one.  3 in 3 years, do the math. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

You can nitpick around the edges but the predictions of the 70's are in hindsight abject failures. I was a big fan of Paul Ehrlich and Barry Commoner back in the day, read everything they wrote. The experience made me the skeptic I am today. Prophets of doom all the way to the bank.

Is this a glimpse into origin of Dog Denial Disorder?   Were you a young Joseph Abbot reading follower of all that prophesied environmental consequence for our action?   Some proved to be BS, so you decided the secret to a Happiness was to follow the philosophy of a dog?   Trash everything without plan or worry for tomorrow, and trust Master to clean it up when he got off work?   A world after Dog has no meaning, so there is no need to plan for the needs of future dogs?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Lark said:

You cherry picked 13 failed predictions.    7 of those were clearly wrong.    # 1 was likely wrong.    # 10 was absolutely correct, and you got it wrong even with the crystal ball of hindsight.   #4 was simplistic but likely close to correct.    #2 and #3 did not have a time frame as you list them.   Just because they have not happened yet doesn't mean they are not happening.   I  assume those who were old enough to talk in 1970 were wise enough to make many accurate predictions, but you did not include on this cherry picked list.    Perhaps as many environmental predictions were wrong as financial predictions?   More embarrassing was your failure to realize some of the predictions you mocked came true or would have come true without action.   Also consider these predictions were made with slide rule modeling at best, and mostly by simple observation and extrapolation.   That is far different from modern computer modeling.

Was #10 really correct?  If so, then who cares?  Because we have some pollution, we have other things that prolong our lifespan.  Before "air pollution," half of all children died before age 10.  Now that number is much lower because of the things that we have created which have side effects of some air pollution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Lark said:

Is this a glimpse into origin of Dog Denial Disorder?   Were you a young Joseph Abbot reading follower of all that prophesied environmental consequence for our action?   Some proved to be BS, so you decided the secret to a Happiness was to follow the philosophy of a dog?   Trash everything without plan or worry for tomorrow, and trust Master to clean it up when he got off work?   A world after Dog has no meaning, so there is no need to plan for the needs of future dogs?   

I'm not a denier, I'm a skeptic.  (Who btw shoveled a lot of that increasingly rare snow again this winter). You're welcome to believe what you will about predictions of doom and about me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Dog said:

I'm not a denier, I'm a skeptic.  (Who btw shoveled a lot of that increasingly rare snow again this winter). You're welcome to believe what you will about predictions of doom and about me.

I meant Edward Abbey,   Sorry?

Regarding the snow, the government link I quoted above was interesting.   Cooler then average for half the US, but not record low temperatures.   Several record high temperatures around the world.    Our unending winter was less extreme then it seemed, when compared to long term averages.   We’ve gotten used to sailing in November and April, and want to sail in March.   Not a reliable indicator I admit, but my launch date was only a few days behind last year.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, random said:

Doesn't matter what the predictions were Shill-Dog. the numbers are in, the climate is changing while you yap shit.

How is the sking? Plenty of snow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, random said:

Doesn't matter what the predictions were Shill-Dog. the numbers are in, the climate is changing while you yap shit.

When the debate is over the predictions it kinda does matter what they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LB 15 said:

How is the sking? Plenty of snow?

None, climate has changed.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, random said:

None, climate has changed.

Did they give you your money back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dog said:

When the debate is over the predictions it kinda does matter what they are.

What debate?  I haven't seen any debate.  Only shill denials of what is obviously happening.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LB 15 said:

Did they give you your money back?

Friends don't ask for money.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, random said:

Friends don't ask for money.

I thought they didn't let them race PHS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, random said:

What debate?  I haven't seen any debate.  Only shill denials of what is obviously happening.

Did you believe the arctic ice cap would be gone by 2013?  If you didn't you're skeptic and correct. If you did you're a believer and wrong.

BTW...After that fiasco with the tides you clearly can't be trusted to observe what's happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Dog said:

Did you believe the arctic ice cap would be gone by 2013?  If you didn't you're skeptic and correct. If you did you're a believer and wrong.

BTW...After that fiasco with the tides you clearly can't be trusted to observe what's happening.

No I didn't believe the 2013 claim because I was watching the data accumulate and it looked to be later to me, and it is.

The tides are ~3mm x 40 years = 120mm higher at my surfing spot.  That's enough to cause what I saw.

Got anything else Shill-Dog?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2018 at 9:13 PM, LB 15 said:

I thought they didn't let them race PHS?

good show, oldboy, bloody good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, random said:

No I didn't believe the 2013 claim because I was watching the data accumulate and it looked to be later to me, and it is.

The tides are ~3mm x 40 years = 120mm higher at my surfing spot.  That's enough to cause what I saw.

Got anything else Shill-Dog?

Any sign of Harold Holt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, random said:

No I didn't believe the 2013 claim because I was watching the data accumulate and it looked to be later to me, and it is.

The tides are ~3mm x 40 years = 120mm higher at my surfing spot.  That's enough to cause what I saw.

Got anything else Shill-Dog?

So you were skeptical of the prediction that the arctic cap would be gone by 2013.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/04/2018 at 8:10 AM, Dog said:

I'm not a denier, I'm a skeptic.

No, you are a lying cunt of a Disinformation Agent.

FreedomWorks is “one of the main political outfits of the conservative movement and an instrumental force within the tea party,” according to a 2012 article in Mother Jones. In 2009, the investigative magazine also rated FreedomWorks as one of their Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial.” [4], [5]

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dog said:

So you were skeptical of the prediction that the arctic cap would be gone by 2013.

No, I checked the science and came to my own conclusions from researching multiple sources.

Lying shill cunts cherry pick one that suits their evil fucking cause!

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, random said:

No, I checked the science and came to my own conclusions from researching multiple sources.

Lying shill cunts cherry pick one that suits their evil fucking cause!

Did you believe the "snow would become increasingly rare" one or were you skeptical of that one too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Did you believe the "snow would become increasingly rare" one or were you skeptical of that one too?

The science I have read indicates more extreme events, like blizzards in north America and droughts in other parts.

Some areas will get more snow, some less.

Shill-cunts like Shill-Dog, cherry pick locations that get more snow and claim that holds true for everywhere.

image.png.5e22302cccdebc0ae3dc19914275c590.png

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dog said:

"Climate change is ‘not as bad as we thought’ say scientists"

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/950748/climate-change-scientists-impact-not-as-bad-on-planet

Where is "the study" they refer to?   Only a rant by a barking mad Lord Dawson.

Fail.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Thirty years of data have been collected since Mr. Hansen outlined his scenarios—enough to determine which was closest to reality. And the winner is Scenario C. Global surface temperature has not increased significantly since 2000, discounting the larger-than-usual El Niño of 2015-16. Assessed by Mr. Hansen’s model, surface temperatures are behaving as if we had capped 18 years ago the carbon-dioxide emissions responsible for the enhanced greenhouse effect. But we didn’t. And it isn’t just Mr. Hansen who got it wrong. Models devised by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have, on average, predicted about twice as much warming as has been observed since global satellite temperature monitoring began 40 years ago…”

“Several more of Mr. Hansen’s predictions can now be judged by history. Have hurricanes gotten stronger, as Mr. Hansen predicted in a 2016 study? No. Satellite data from 1970 onward shows no evidence of this in relation to global surface temperature. Have storms caused increasing amounts of damage in the U.S.? Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show no such increase in damage, measured as a percentage of gross domestic product. How about stronger tornadoes? The opposite may be true, as NOAA data offers some evidence of a decline. The list of what didn’t happen is long and tedious.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/thirty-years-on-how-well-do-global-warming-predictions-stand-up-1529623442

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

“Thirty years of data have been collected since Mr. Hansen outlined his scenarios—enough to determine which was closest to reality. And the winner is Scenario C. Global surface temperature has not increased significantly since 2000, discounting the larger-than-usual El Niño of 2015-16. Assessed by Mr. Hansen’s model, surface temperatures are behaving as if we had capped 18 years ago the carbon-dioxide emissions responsible for the enhanced greenhouse effect. But we didn’t. And it isn’t just Mr. Hansen who got it wrong. Models devised by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have, on average, predicted about twice as much warming as has been observed since global satellite temperature monitoring began 40 years ago…”

“Several more of Mr. Hansen’s predictions can now be judged by history. Have hurricanes gotten stronger, as Mr. Hansen predicted in a 2016 study? No. Satellite data from 1970 onward shows no evidence of this in relation to global surface temperature. Have storms caused increasing amounts of damage in the U.S.? Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show no such increase in damage, measured as a percentage of gross domestic product. How about stronger tornadoes? The opposite may be true, as NOAA data offers some evidence of a decline. The list of what didn’t happen is long and tedious.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/thirty-years-on-how-well-do-global-warming-predictions-stand-up-1529623442

Of one thing we are certain,  Hansen may be the best "cool-aid" salesman of the last century.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lake MI is still fucking cold! But, that's due to a chilly spring and the fucker then flipping ahead of schedule.

Are we getting warmer? Yes. My climate zone has changed. Both my agronomist and entomologist have tracked it by growing days, invasive species and types of bugs we have. They're all different from 20 years ago. Stuff has pushed north. I plant a different strain of corn than we used to. It used to be 90 day corn. Now I get away with 100 day corn. Good for me because that's higher yield but all of these are trend markers of a warming environment.

I've got records going back to 1851. It's changed a lot since then. Plant types and bugs are totally different. Some for the good and others for the un-good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, austin1972 said:

Lake MI is still fucking cold! But, that's due to a chilly spring and the fucker then flipping ahead of schedule.

Are we getting warmer? Yes. My climate zone has changed. Both my agronomist and entomologist have tracked it by growing days, invasive species and types of bugs we have. They're all different from 20 years ago. Stuff has pushed north. I plant a different strain of corn than we used to. It used to be 90 day corn. Now I get away with 100 day corn. Good for me because that's higher yield but all of these are trend markers of a warming environment.

I've got records going back to 1851. It's changed a lot since then. Plant types and bugs are totally different. Some for the good and others for the un-good.

Sure but is the warming abnormal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dog said:

Sure but is the warming abnormal?

Science says yes. Anyone who has taken organic chemistry can replicate it in a lab. Just look at ocean acidification. There are markers everywhere that relate to one another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dog said:

Sure but is the warming abnormal?

Not sure what you mean by 'abnormal'? There is abundant evidence that it is happening and that it is undesirable. There is no evidence that such a significant warming over such a short period of time is normal.

It is also interesting to see that the antis are now saying that warming is happening after so many years of saying it was not happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Not sure what you mean by 'abnormal'? There is abundant evidence that it is happening and that it is undesirable. There is no evidence that such a significant warming over such a short period of time is normal.

It is also interesting to see that the antis are now saying that warming is happening after so many years of saying it was not happening.

We’ve gone from “Isn't happening” to claiming it’s caused by body heat or natural cycles.    The next phase will be blaming VP Gore and Pres Obama for not making them understand.   Finally we begin the fanciful industrial projects where big oil and clean coal spend lots of American taxpayer dollars testing large scale engineering solutions involving thick reflective layers of smog.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Not sure what you mean by 'abnormal'? There is abundant evidence that it is happening and that it is undesirable. There is no evidence that such a significant warming over such a short period of time is normal.

It is also interesting to see that the antis are now saying that warming is happening after so many years of saying it was not happening.

It is also interesting to see that the antis are now saying.....

The CAGW skeptics (antis?) have repeatedly pointed out that warming has been happening since the 1850s. Wild upswing/downswings were recorded then, 1850-1880 ish..

 

There is abundant evidence that it is happening and that it is undesirable...….

The last ice age was undesirable also.  Hawaii volcanoes are undesirable,  California earthquakes too...…..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just listened to a TED Talk on NPR that’s frightening for my grandson’s generation. If you have the time, it’s worth the listen. 

https://www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/?showDate=2018-06-22

Anthropocene

Some scientists say we're in a new geological age where humans are having an unprecedented impact on Earth. This hour, TED speakers ask what this means for the future of our planet, and our species.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sean said:

Just listened to a TED Talk on NPR that’s frightening for my grandson’s generation. If you have the time, it’s worth the listen. 

https://www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/?showDate=2018-06-22

Anthropocene

Some scientists say we're in a new geological age where humans are having an unprecedented impact on Earth. This hour, TED speakers ask what this means for the future of our planet, and our species.

Well if it's any consolation we now have 30 years of observations confirming that the climate has not responded to anthropogenic influences as predicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Dog said:

Well if it's any consolation we now have 30 years of observations confirming that the climate has not responded to anthropogenic influences as predicted. 

You are such a cunt doggy.  Lying criminal cunt!

According to the last President you are a terrorist when you deny the findings of US scientists and advocat ignoring what is a threat to the security of your own country.

"I'm here today to say that climate change constitutes a serious threat to global security, an immediate risk to our national security," he said. "And make no mistake, it will impact how our military defends our country."

Climate change, he said, "will shape how every one of our services plan, operate, train, equip and protect their infrastructure, their capabilities, today and for the long term." And given that so many military facilities are coastal, that could threaten their readiness for action, he said."

But your Russian controlled President watered that down, because Russia will benefit from climate change.  Doggy is a Russian shill.

ComradeDog.thumb.jpg.9b229c557f1f45f6bb5fcb4337af3a44.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

You are such a cunt doggy.  Lying criminal cunt!

According to the last President you are a terrorist when you deny the findings of US scientists and advocat ignoring what is a threat to the security of your own country.

"I'm here today to say that climate change constitutes a serious threat to global security, an immediate risk to our national security," he said. "And make no mistake, it will impact how our military defends our country."

Climate change, he said, "will shape how every one of our services plan, operate, train, equip and protect their infrastructure, their capabilities, today and for the long term." And given that so many military facilities are coastal, that could threaten their readiness for action, he said."

But your Russian controlled President watered that down, because Russia will benefit from climate change.  Doggy is a Russian shill.

ComradeDog.thumb.jpg.9b229c557f1f45f6bb5fcb4337af3a44.jpg

Bla...bla...bla...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

Bla...bla...bla...

ComradeDog.thumb.jpg.96418aed58e702720b09cb52dece88d2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, random said:

ComradeDog.thumb.jpg.96418aed58e702720b09cb52dece88d2.jpg

And my statement remains true...we still have 30 years of observations confirming that the climate has not responded to anthropogenic influences as predicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dog said:

And my statement remains true...we still have 30 years of observations confirming that the climate has not responded to anthropogenic influences as predicted.

You are correct, it is worse than predicted.

Climate Change Is Happening Faster Than Expected, and It’s More Extreme

Worst-case global warming predictions are the most accurate, say climate experts

ComradeDog.thumb.jpg.a9c9861c1c39b98be7c54c4857684c41.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, random said:

You sir ate a cunt and a dickwad. You cite an article that suggests  "could" and "might" in studies. No science, no studies, no data. Fuck  off...….

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites