What does 10 TRILLION gallons of water even equate to?
That's one weather prediction for southern California in the next week.
Gary Haupt
Gary Haupt
Forum Discussion
Newbiecampers wrote:
It is the height of human ignorance to disbelieve scientific evidence, and to look for any possible way out of it, by misdirection and finger-pointing. Do you remember what a fight it was to get lead out of gasoline?
It is the height of human arrogance to think we know for certain what is going on, and more importantly, that it is or is not man made.
I didn't want to enter into this anymore because it's a waste of time, but you specifically attacked me. Dismiss me, call me names.. I don't care. Science doesn't care what you believe.Boon Docker wrote:
So maybe you should get the ball rolling and sell your RV. :B
Ha ha. :B
I have no such fears of catastrophic end-of-times results due to our current situation. Nor do I try to convince anyone of such.
I will continue to enjoy any rv we may get, whatever form it takes.
I just don't suffer hypocrites. :Dwestend wrote:
I really can't find anyone telling you (or anyone else) to change any of your behavior within this thread. You're confusing process with cause and effect.
May not be coming right out and saying it, but to me, it sort of goes along with the whole accusations of "science deniers." And they do expect some sort of change to occur to eliminate this "threat" from CO2. It is presented in their claims of a catastrophic end-result unless we do change. How else is that change going to come about other than ultimately forcing others to change their behavior? They may not directly be asking, they'll just have others do it.
Personally, I don't have any great answers to the climate change problems. If there was a "magic bullet" that hit the target with all of us, I would sure suggest it.
There is part of the problem for me: who is to say that any climate change that might be occurring, is that far out of the ordinary when looking at earth's entire history? Or that it is even man made. There have been drastic variations in climate for eons.
I sure don't have anything against decentralizing the electrical grid and individuals using alternative energy sources like wind, solar, and hydro. If Mr. Jones down the street has an array of solar panels but Mrs. Jones uses a clothes dryer, I'm not going to lose any sleep.
I tend to believe that a majority of us are well-thinking adults and can make appropriate decisions.
I have absolutely nothing against solar or wind. And I don't lose one iota of sleep about it either. But there are many out there that want wind power, then refuse to put them up on their own coasts, where the wind is. There are those that want to force their view on others with regards to climage change. They many not do it directly, but hide behind the curtain and have others do it. That is where I have a problem, especially when those individuals continue to live the lifestyle that supposedly is leading us to ruin. I would actually like to see a decentralized power grid, from nothing more than a reliablity/security aspect
And I somewhat diagree with the notion that the majority of us are well-thinking adults anymore.
Far too much agenda pushing (which leads to the bending of "facts" on all sides), far too many schemes, far too much narcisstic "selfie" mentality these days. This country has become about nothing other than money and self-absorbed control, and it has infected everything.
Just got a fine example of that this weekend. Class C we were interested in was in process of being sold. With regards to taking a class C on a test drive (which we have not yet), the salesmen said to us: "we can just wait until the purchasers aren't around, then let you drive it around."
Summed it all up for me.- So maybe you should get the ball rolling and sell your RV. :B
2oldman wrote:
No GW believers I know, including me, are telling people what to do. We're telling our government what to do. That's where real change starts.
Thank you. Some truth shines through.
And therein lies one of the biggest problems for me, found in your statement.
When you are telling your government what to do, you are in fact telling other people what to do. You want the government to step in and legislate, or somehow mandate a change on your behalf. The government then tells other's what they can or cannot do via those mandates. To say you are not telling other's what to do is nonsense. You are simply hiding behind the government. You are the wizard of oz, hiding behind the curtain.
I have a real problem with individuals that demand or preach that change is needed, change that can lead to restrictions or taxes on other individuals, yet they continue to live aspects of the very lifestyle that are supposedly leading to the very problems they are trying to change. No matter how small a part they are still living.
Especially when the demand for change is based on what it is.
It is the height of human arrogance to think we know for certain what is going on, and more importantly, that it is or is not man made.
It was roughly but a scant 10,000 years ago (that is nothing on a geological time line) that we were in the last ice-age where ice, some as thick as a mile plus, was covering much of the world. The earth has had huge climate shifts over billions of years, and to say that we know anything for certain is nonsense, but typical of our ingrained arrogance. The timeline for the data we have, when looked at in the context of the roughly 4 billion year age of the earth, is statistically insignificant.
And then there is the "follow the money." So many aspects of our society have become nothing but ponzi-schemes, have become consumed by fraud and agenda-filled "facts." There is money and an agenda behind -everything- these days. The media, the government, universites, "science," all of it. Like the carbon credit trading exchange that gore and his ilk were trying to set-up back in the day. Few are truly in it for the "cause." And if they start that way, the money soon corrupts. Like grant money for all these "studies." Don't come up with findings that support the individuals awarding the grants, grant $$ goes buh-bye.
Do I think we could use less pollution/garbage in our world? Of course. And for decades in this country we have been successfully following down that path (remember lake erie burning or smog covered LA) But to say that we are are, for certain, heading for some catastrophic conclusion is, to me, suspect. Especially when those preaching it still drive around in RV's. Or fly around in their own private jets. To me, anybody continuing to drive an RV (etc.) is as much a "denier" of their own science as anyone else.ExxWhy wrote:
It's not too difficult to do a quick internet search to come up with names, I'll leave that to those with open minds. Wikii has a list for one, though they still like to trot out the 97 percent agree line.
Robust debate is so encouraged at our institutions of higher learning. Anyone with differing views is welcomed with open arms of course. Yeah right..........good way to have your career destroyed for having the gall to disagree with the gospel.
Let's not forget the champion of the cause, Al Gore. Inventor of the internet. To his credit, he's done quite well for himself. Follow the money, exhibit A.
Agreed to an extent.
University is where I met people with well rounded opposing views and began consciously utilising critical thinking in everyday life. Left that "Nah nah nah, I'm better than you are" J.H.S./middle school defensive thunk behind at the same time; so freeing.
IMO, following the money is only part of the path but to each his own mindset:).
I would never allow Al Gore to operate on me-that would be Ben Carson's vocation. Conversely, I'd never name, Dr.Carson, HUD Secretary just because he once lived in a housing project.
I've no need to google such a basic member of the current US administration. Too wired into the political process i supposed.
Logic rules my life.- It's not too difficult to do a quick internet search to come up with names, I'll leave that to those with open minds. Wikii has a list for one, though they still like to trot out the 97 percent agree line.
Robust debate is so encouraged at our institutions of higher learning. Anyone with differing views is welcomed with open arms of course. Yeah right..........good way to have your career destroyed for having the gall to disagree with the gospel.
Let's not forget the champion of the cause, Al Gore. Inventor of the internet. To his credit, he's done quite well for himself. Follow the money, exhibit A. TechWriter wrote:
ExxWhy wrote:
The only name calling I see in this thread is those who like to call me and others "deniers" (with dripping venom). Yet those same people can't seem to realize they deny the existence of many scientists who disagree with their conclusions.
Examples?
Student raises her hand gesticulating wildly:"Teacherrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, teacher I HAVE an answer!!!"
"Ben Carson!", who also believes the pyramids were used for grain storage...ExxWhy wrote:
The only name calling I see in this thread is those who like to call me and others "deniers" (with dripping venom). Yet those same people can't seem to realize they deny the existence of many scientists who disagree with their conclusions.
Examples?westend wrote:
What about the "idiot", "sucker", "a five year old", "radical", and the other instances that have occurred in this thread? I guess if you aren't on the side being demeaned, they may go unnoticed.
We can agree on this point. Obviously I looked right past those terms. Just like you looked right past it yourself by calling me sophomoric for my views in the very next paragraph.
How does money fit in all of this? It's not like climate scientists are wealthy, usually the opposite. Big Oil, on the other hand, has tremendous resources and uses it all the time to foist their agenda. To internalize these issues into an anti-USA campaign is rather sophomoric. It is a worldwide problem and that is the reason for conventions and pacts being offered and agreed/disagreed to.
When trillions of dollars are (proposed) being thrown around for the non solutions, yes it does make me think it's all about the money. One of the favorite facts that gets immediately thrown out is about the amount of energy we in the USA use. That makes us the easy scapegoat along with the fact we have money that others want. .
To continue the whole quote of Ms Figueres"..That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 - you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation."
I believe what she's referring to is the change from a society that cares little about pollution to sustaining an economy that also takes responsibility for climate change into the process. It is not an indictment about any particular economic model but a transformation of all economic models.
We disagree on that interpretation completely. I think she means exactly what she said. Especially when coupled with the other comment I quoted.
What occurs to me is that climate science is very divisive with some folks taking a strict "black or white" view of it. IME, it's involved with natural science so there is a whole lot of complexity to the overview and any predicted result. Unfortunately, lines have been drawn in the sand and objections, misinformation, and exaggeration are all at hand. That is from both sides, IMO.
. We agree yet again. Glad you see there ARE two sides of climate science.
To anyone wishing to investigate some of the immediate consequences of climate change, search for a few videos about what is happening in Greenland. The images of a Niagara Falls flowing into the usual permanent ice cap impressed me.
