Obama Administration Takes Action on Climate Change--Big Time

[russ]

If anything, being cautious with the environment is the conservative thing to do! Conservative: doing that which conserves the present conditions- Conservative: damn near the same thing as "conservation." Hello. Not just blindly swallowing the dogma shoveled out by those who have chosen to cast this as a political issue.

Follow your own idea - don't swallow the BS the warmers put out without thought. Things are changing - how much is totally to be learned.

At present too much of the "scientific" study is just emailing BS back and forth supporting foolish warmer stuff.

[Mike90250]

Global Warming - ever since the last Ice Age.

Earth has varied from Ice Ball to Sauna several times throughout it's history. Aliens, or Solar variation ?

Global warming, if caused by human action, is still going to continue, regardless what the USA and EU agree to, simply because India and China are not agreeing , and building fossil fuel plants at a staggering rate. But the Carbon Taxes are our only savior ? Don't believe that for a moment.

[rug_burn]

Global Warming - ever since the last Ice Age.

Earth has varied from Ice Ball to Sauna several times throughout it's history. Aliens, or Solar variation ?

Global warming, if caused by human action, is still going to continue, regardless what the USA and EU agree to, simply because India and China are not agreeing , and building fossil fuel plants at a staggering rate. But the Carbon Taxes are our only savior ? Don't believe that for a moment.

Okay, sure.

Just install bigger air conditioning units... (solar powered, of course)

[russ]

Global warming, if caused by human action, is still going to continue, regardless what the USA and EU agree to, simply because India and China are not agreeing , and building fossil fuel plants at a staggering rate. But the Carbon Taxes are our only savior ? Don't believe that for a moment.

You got it - the company I worked for in India is building coal fired generators - natural gas is too expensive while coal is cheap.

[rug_burn]

You got it - the company I worked for in India is building coal fired generators - natural gas is too expensive while coal is cheap.

Yeah, so India is now the technology leader for the world? We're supposed to follow their lead.

[rug_burn]

Follow your own idea - don't swallow the BS the warmers put out without thought. Things are changing - how much is totally to be learned.

At present too much of the "scientific" study is just emailing BS back and forth supporting foolish warmer stuff.

Have you ever read the articles in Scientific American on this topic? It's right from the scientists themselves, no email exchange. it doesn't leave much doubt, all done with scientific thoroughness...

[russ]

Have you ever read the articles in Scientific American on this topic? It's right from the scientists themselves, no email exchange. it doesn't leave much doubt, all done with scientific thoroughness...

BS in a fancy wrapper. Don't doubt, just follow on.

The science they are talking about is totally new stuff in how different things react to each other and or interact. Not at all tested science but often an educated shot in the dark and sometimes just a shot in the dark.

[rug_burn]

BS in a fancy wrapper. Don't doubt, just follow on.

The science they are talking about is totally new stuff in how different things react to each other and or interact. Not at all tested science but often an educated shot in the dark and sometimes just a shot in the dark.

No, that's not what they are talking about in the Scientific American Articles.

They are talking about the fundamental assumptions of the various studies, and how many years worth of climate data on which these studies are based. These lead to the well known conclusions. Also discussed are other possible explanations for trends seen in the data, and the amount much certainty they have of their overall conclusions.

Those articles to which I refer go back 20 years or so, and the more yearly data the climate database acquires, the more the data agrees with the conclusion that the "enemy are us": we're driving this climate change by putting greenhouse gases in the air.

Check it out. They got no political bone to pick.

[russ]

No, that's not what they are talking about in the Scientific American Articles.

They are talking about the fundamental assumptions of the various studies, and how many years worth of climate data on which these studies are based. These lead to certain conclusions, and the studies routinely discuss other possible explanations for trends seen in the data, and to what conclusions the data actually lead and how much certainty they have of those conclusions.

That is how it's done in science, not by simply exchanging emails and re-stating talking points.

Get over the BS - untested science is as likely to be wrong as right. If you have ever worked with chemical or gas based industrial plants you would know that - often as much is unknown about the reactions in a process as what is for sure known.

The warmers are feeding each other BS and have learned to enjoy the taste so they continue the circle - doing it over and over. Data and statistics are wonderful things - you can prove most anything you want.

[Rdjntx]

No, that's not what they are talking about in the Scientific American Articles.

They are talking about the fundamental assumptions of the various studies, and how many years worth of climate data on which these studies are based. These lead to the well known conclusions. Also discussed are other possible explanations for trends seen in the data, and the amount much certainty they have of their overall conclusions.

Those articles to which I refer go back 20 years or so, and the more yearly data the climate database acquires, the more the data agrees with the conclusion that the "enemy are us": we're driving this climate change by putting greenhouse gases in the air.

Check it out. They got no political bone to pick.

yes .. note the red highlights. ASSUMPTIONS are frequently wrong right out of the box. and we are NOT driving this climate change. There is no question that humankind is CONTRIBUTING to climate change which IS happening. but we are not driving it. cyclical climate change has been happening for millions of years, driven by natural forces. just HOW much we are really influencing it is debatable and far from a scientific fact. we are a miniscule blip in time and the amount of time we have spent studying climate change is an even smaller blip.

[rug_burn]

yes .. note the red highlights. ASSUMPTIONS are frequently wrong right out of the box. and we are NOT driving this climate change. There is no question that humankind is CONTRIBUTING to climate change which IS happening. but we are not driving it. cyclical climate change has been happening for millions of years, driven by natural forces. just HOW much we are really influencing it is debatable and far from a scientific fact. we are a miniscule blip in time and the amount of time we have spent studying climate change is an even smaller blip.

Yeah, says you. You'd be better off reading one. I'm wasting my breath here.

You got as better analysis, let's hear it.

[Sunking]

Yeah, says you. You'd be better off reading one. I'm wasting my breath here.

You got as better analysis, let's hear it.

You are a fool, and deserve to loose your money. That is all this is about Money and Control.

[rug_burn]

You are a fool, and deserve to loose your money. That is all this is about Money and Control.

You guys are funny. You're crackin' me up...

[Rdjntx]

Yeah, says you. You'd be better off reading one. I'm wasting my breath here.

You got as better analysis, let's hear it.

you are wasting your breath because you are a sheeple of al gore.

they made a bunch of ASSumptions in the 70s that said the earth would be in dire straights by 2000 (see my earlier post which I am sure you discounted since it was not pro warming) and they made the same exact claims as to cause and what needed to be done in order to prevent the calamity. and as I said in that post here we are in 2014 and nothing in their predictions has changed other than WHEn it is supposed to happen. but you keep drinking the kool-aid

[SunEagle]

Yeah, says you. You'd be better off reading one. I'm wasting my breath here.

You got as better analysis, let's hear it.

Actually Rdjntx is not the only one here saying that most of what you have been reading and believing are very bad assumptions based on a thimble full of data.

A better analysis is that the world is going through another climate change only this time we are here to witness it.

Also as Rdjntx stated and I agree, humans are contributing to the issue but we aren't even a back seat driver let alone in control of what is happening.