What does 10 TRILLION gallons of water even equate to?

CO2 ( a gas ) is now "carbon". It is uberpoweful because 50/1,000,000 th of an increase of it can change Earth's climate. It also changes mass when emitted in exhaust gases. It goes in as pounds of fuel and comes out as tons.

Turtle n Peeps wrote:
I think I understand why you don't want to answer my simple question. :B It's all good. :)

Many more inches of rain today in Nor Cal. Filling up more wells and aquafers in the state is a good thing.

I'm glad that you see that I don't see it as a simple question and respect my reasons for not responding in greater depth:B
Maybe see you on the RV trail where we can discuss it in greater depth over a beer (or ice wine...oops!) :cool:.

MrWizard wrote:


Should we poison our air so we can't breath ? NO
SHOULD WE take blame for climate/weather change ? NO

Should we be taxed for this? (carbon tax) H**L NO

I think I understand why you don't want to answer my simple question. :B It's all good. :)

Many more inches of rain today in Nor Cal. Filling up more wells and aquafers in the state is a good thing.

Climate vs Weather. No such thing, they are intertwined two words/parts of the same thing
Weather today is rain, Friday was stormy, sometime this week we might see some sun
We live in a temperate climate, meaning temperature changes and weather changes
If the avg final temp is 1* higher more than 100 yrs ago? So what
A thousand years ago it was different, app t ox 150 years ago when volcanoes blew up and spewed ash in the air , it was unbelievably cold there was a cold summer
And low crop yields and famine,
Man did not do that
The arctic used to be tropical and full of dinosaurs,
The earth crust moves, volcanoes erupt, meteors strike, the weather and climate change, with out anything to do with man

Should we poison our air so we can't breath ? NO
SHOULD WE take blame for climate/weather change ? NO

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

NYCgrrl wrote:

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

and in fact is used by both sides of the climate control debate.

Hu? :h
How can anybody argue that "man" was the cause of climate problems when he wasn't even around then? There always was wide swings and more than likely always will be.

The person you cited in the hyperlink as an authority on climate and it's causes is a perfect example. I knew his name but in the fog of late night posting forgot why. This morning when I looked at the chart it came to me in a flash. Lappis, is NOT the author of the paper but an energy professional, who extended and uploaded the graphics using his own interpretation of the data.

The actual writer of the book the info came from is on the opposite side of the debate, Prof. Richard Alley.

I think you'd have to read the book in order to argue the validity of the research and hypothesis. It's called "The Two-Mile Time Machine: Ice Cores, Abrupt Climate Change, and Our Future".

HTH

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

The fact is man has not been around for millions of years. We have core samples that show for a fact that there were wild swings in temperature millions of years ago. I linked you to one.

My question to "you" is this: How can "man" cause wild swings in temperature when he wasn't even around to cause them?

And my answer to you is read the book and then we'll all be on the same page/topic and able to discuss the subject on the same level:). Should you then disagree with the author's conclusion well then we have something to debate/discuss amicably. IMO, Mr. Lappis was intellectually dishonest to pass the graphic off as his own although it COULD be he was merely watermarking the info. We won't know his motivations since he's dead.

I did not enter this thread to discuss the different sides of the modern and unfortunately in this country highly politicized climate control debate. I've given up on politics on this site unless it's being discussed in a humorous manner. Anddddddddd we all know how long even that will last.

I merely pointed out incorrect information that was being promulgated as to time frames and sources of information and where it came from.

I'm sorry you did not understand what I'm saying so I'll say it again:

Read the book

NYCgrrl wrote:

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

and in fact is used by both sides of the climate control debate.

Hu? :h
How can anybody argue that "man" was the cause of climate problems when he wasn't even around then? There always was wide swings and more than likely always will be.

The person you cited in the hyperlink as an authority on climate and it's causes is a perfect example. I knew his name but in the fog of late night posting forgot why. This morning when I looked at the chart it came to me in a flash. Lappis, is NOT the author of the paper but an energy professional, who extended and uploaded the graphics using his own interpretation of the data.

The actual writer of the book the info came from is on the opposite side of the debate, Prof. Richard Alley.

I think you'd have to read the book in order to argue the validity of the research and hypothesis. It's called "The Two-Mile Time Machine: Ice Cores, Abrupt Climate Change, and Our Future".

HTH

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

The fact is man has not been around for millions of years. We have core samples that show for a fact that there were wild swings in temperature millions of years ago. I linked you to one.

My question to "you" is this: How can "man" cause wild swings in temperature when he wasn't even around to cause them?

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

and in fact is used by both sides of the climate control debate.

Hu? :h
How can anybody argue that "man" was the cause of climate problems when he wasn't even around then? There always was wide swings and more than likely always will be.

The person you cited in the hyperlink as an authority on climate and it's causes is a perfect example. I knew his name but in the fog of late night posting forgot why. This morning when I looked at the chart it came to me in a flash. Lappis, is NOT the author of the paper but an energy professional, who extended and uploaded the graphics using his own interpretation of the data.

The actual writer of the book the info came from is on the opposite side of the debate, Prof. Richard Alley.

I think you'd have to read the book in order to argue the validity of the research and hypothesis. It's called "The Two-Mile Time Machine: Ice Cores, Abrupt Climate Change, and Our Future".

HTH

Last Friday it was an uncomfortable drive on Jalama Rd, US 1, US 101, Cal 23, al 118, I 5, US 134. Lots of rocks, palm frons, flooded underpasses, trees down and idiots that don't know their driving is a hazard to several thousand folks driving safely below the speed limit with their headlights, not their DRLs on and passing at 5 to 10 mph faster than the vehicle next to them in flooded areas. I could go on and on about that 1 percent on the road Friday, but it raises my normally low BP.