Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-30-2015, 01:02 AM   #127
Len and Jeanne
 
Len n Jeanne's Avatar
 
2005 16' International CCD
2015 19' Flying Cloud
Creston Valley , British Columbia
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Eklund View Post
I am disappointed that those with the weakest facts believe this is a debate over Gun Control and Concealed Carry Permits.

Point One. Melting glaciers due to Global Warming. True. They are melting and not because of human activity. The planet is in a Inter Glacial period of warming. It has happened numerous times... even when humans were in small numbers. ....
Ray, maybe you'd like to talk about the Little Ice Age (so called) that was a cooling trend particularly noticeable in the 17th and 18th centuries. Some climatologists argue that this should have been a longer-term trend, based on causal factors, that reversed abruptly in the 19th century, coinciding with noticeable increases in atmospheric CO2.

The issue with climate change isn't only the "what" but how quickly change is occurring. Geologic time is much slower than what is happening today.

Quote:
When the Ice retreated, the continent rebounded from the weight removed on the surface. Continents FLOAT on the mantle like ice cubes in a glass of water. Shocked? Like forcing a basketball into a bucket and reducing the pressure, it rises.

The subject is only divisive when one side has no proof to prop up their beliefs. Science provides proofs that a Theory is correct and facts that a layman can go out and discover it for themselves. I do not need a computer to know that the sea level has been rising since the retreat of each and every Ice Age.
Isostatic rebound is a known phenomenon that is still taking place over thousands of years, but it certainly isn't the only one that determines whether we are gaining or losing coastline. With isostatic rebound we might expect some land masses to continue to rise higher than the oceans, so when something unanticipated happens in a much faster time than the norm, it may take some science a little more advanced than a basket ball in a bucket of water to determine why.

Quote:
...of the Planet when the mountain chains were bringing up rich petroleum and coal formations to the surface, polluting the atmosphere. Most cannot, as it happens slowly. There are underground coal fires, I call steamers, in Wyoming within geologic formations. Does anyone want to put them out to reduce pollution, or fine VW for its diesel exhaust?
Ray, as you know, anthropogenic burning of fossil fuels is putting carbon into the atmosphere at a far more rapid rate than simple mountain-building processes would, given that you are talking about 10s of millions of years, not a few centuries. You may be fortunate enough to live well inland in an area without major temperature inversions that trap auto exhaust, but not everybody is.

Moreover, (CDONA) if we have a natural process like volcanoes already dumping fumes into the atmosphere, human activity is adding to that process. It's not a comparison (a=b or a>b), but additive (a+b).

Quote:
Dare I even bring up Human Evolution and Darwin?
Well, sure. No problem there.

J. Morgan, would you mind saying what evidence you actually would accept as evidence of human-caused climate change?

Because if you're looking for some type of catastrophe ready-to-hand, it's sort of like knowing that your AS has a propane leak, and being warned that you risk an explosion. Yet you've seen no evidence of any explosion, the propane leak seems small, and so you dismiss the risk. By the time you've seen the tangible evidence of an explosion, however, it's too late to fix the problem.

DPRoberts said this better than I did.

Again, a little atmospheric carbon goes a long way.

Just wondering how many of the anti-environmentalists here have a strong scientific background.....
__________________

__________________
Len n Jeanne is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 01:09 AM   #128
jcl
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulnGina View Post
I don't think that that is a good example of timing. That is an article from February, almost 10 months ago. But there is an upside to the passage of time in this case.

The article was very widely criticized for false information.

Do you know why the temperature records were adjusted? Only to be able to compare them. Some weather stations used temperatures sampled in the mornings. Some in the afternoons. Different types of thermometers. Standardizing the readings is a form of calibration to better be able to compare across sites and over time. Calibration is generally considered a good thing, as owners of torque wrenches and gun sights (among others) will tell us. It produces more consistent results. If you object to calibration when you know that a measurement device has a repeatable offset, you are choosing to go with a wrong number.

The largest adjustments were in the high Arctic. The location where the Telegraph article drew a link to warmer temperatures (claiming they weren't reliable because the readings were adjusted upward. But those adjustments were downwards. That is what some would call an inconvenient truth. The author ignored that detail, claiming the opposite.

The adjustments occurred primarily in the pre 1960s, which is not the period when we are tracking the greatest warming effect.

There is a graph in the link below showing the temperatures with and without the correction. Take a look at the difference. The Telegraph didn't.

The Telegraph article is selling a viewpoint based on headlines. The link below explains the changes, but also gives you the actual weather station data so that you can decide for yourself. This takes us back to the need for critical thinking.

But most telling to me is what happened when it was pointed out to the Telegraph (publication standards) that the article was misleading. They wrote, and I quote:

"This is clearly an opinion article and identifiable as such. Against the background described above, readers can be expected to understand that any evidence offered is almost certainly contestable"

What they are saying is that they know it isn't right, but that readers will understand that it isn't a scientific article, that the numbers are not correct. In other words, that nobody should take it seriously.

All they want to do is sell newspapers. And ten months after they published this opinion piece, as they call it, it appears to be working because people are linking to it thinking that the numbers in it mean something.

If you want to look at scientific data, look to published papers.

For a list of many papers that discuss the subject, and more details on the above, see this link:

Telegraph wrong again on temperature adjustments

If you don't like that site (John Cook is an award winning climate science communicator) then there are many others. Lots of links available.


Quote:
Originally Posted by avionstream View Post
Pretty much confirms what many if us are saying.
The above is very unfortunate for those "many" who are saying that.
__________________

__________________
jcl is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 05:37 AM   #129
Rivet Master
 
Ray Eklund's Avatar

 
2014 25' International
2006 23' Safari SE
Currently Looking...
Boulder City , Nevada
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,369
Reading these posts, I must point out one important term used in the title of this thread... Geological. Much like the Broncos football game last evening... you can dissect the game as much as you want, but the score remains the same.

Geology. The Study of the HISTORY of the Earth.

I did not mention politics, until now. I did not predict what geologic formations to expect tomorrow... only what are already deposited within Geologic Time. Anyone that knows the Geologic Eras, Periods and Life Forms must understand that Climate Change is obvious and continues to this moment. We are just parroting what others have said and know no more or less from this, nor will anyone change the mind of another.

Until the brightest minds of SCIENCE focus on those events that actually have OCCURRED, we still understand very little. Weathermen cannot predict the weather on October 14, 3204 no better nor worse than next month, even using current time information and facts. Weather changes. We cannot even control the wind, as much as we think it possible.

Humans are opportunists by nature. Caterpillars are much like us. They will devour the leaves that give them life, morph into a winged insect that leave the denuded bush/tree to fend for what is left of itself. We have a special ability and that is to think our way out of problems. Sometimes. We put to ruin one place today and are now discovering that there are few places NOT in the same situation we find ourselves. Maybe wanting you to move out for their benefit.

Survival of the Fittest? Maybe. I have yet to see my Blue Heeler dogs fight over a television set on Black Friday, but they sure will fight over some rotting dead animal when starving. Survival.

Humans are motivated by rewards that are pleasant or improve their lives. A stranger, without an unpleasant response from yourself, might move into your home while you are on vacation and raise their family. Birds do it every year. Many return to the same nesting area, if not the same nest. You see a difference, but birds accept this as normal behavior.

Each change in the geological formations where you live are Climate Change. Understand why and you will have gained some knowledge that might apply to the present.

The cunning minds of our fellow humans find a way to be opportunists... again. Ignoring that change will come with or without our propensity to copy the caterpillar with no memory to guide their decisions. They just do it and move on. Humans... no longer can move on, but still do what serves themselves best.

Once we have exploited one resource and consumed all that remains, new ones will be put to use. Geologic time is patient. The Earth rotates slower today than in the geologic past. Eventually we will be found within one thin group of rock formations as a stark reminder that some life forms devour their own. Our fate is not yet written within the rocks of time... but we may be getting there as a specie, that consumed itself into a very thin slice of stone as our legacy. Not much to show at all.
__________________
Human Bean
Ray Eklund is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 06:12 AM   #130
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Nowhere , Somewhere
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,418
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Len n Jeanne View Post
Ray, maybe you'd like to talk about the Little Ice Age (so called) that was a cooling trend particularly noticeable in the 17th and 18th centuries. Some climatologists argue that this should have been a longer-term trend, based on causal factors, that reversed abruptly in the 19th century, coinciding with noticeable increases in atmospheric CO2.

The issue with climate change isn't only the "what" but how quickly change is occurring. Geologic time is much slower than what is happening today.

Isostatic rebound is a known phenomenon that is still taking place over thousands of years, but it certainly isn't the only one that determines whether we are gaining or losing coastline. With isostatic rebound we might expect some land masses to continue to rise higher than the oceans, so when something unanticipated happens in a much faster time than the norm, it may take some science a little more advanced than a basket ball in a bucket of water to determine why.

Ray, as you know, anthropogenic burning of fossil fuels is putting carbon into the atmosphere at a far more rapid rate than simple mountain-building processes would, given that you are talking about 10s of millions of years, not a few centuries. You may be fortunate enough to live well inland in an area without major temperature inversions that trap auto exhaust, but not everybody is.

Moreover, (CDONA) if we have a natural process like volcanoes already dumping fumes into the atmosphere, human activity is adding to that process. It's not a comparison (a=b or a>b), but additive (a+b).

Well, sure. No problem there.

J. Morgan, would you mind saying what evidence you actually would accept as evidence of human-caused climate change?

Because if you're looking for some type of catastrophe ready-to-hand, it's sort of like knowing that your AS has a propane leak, and being warned that you risk an explosion. Yet you've seen no evidence of any explosion, the propane leak seems small, and so you dismiss the risk. By the time you've seen the tangible evidence of an explosion, however, it's too late to fix the problem.

DPRoberts said this better than I did.

Again, a little atmospheric carbon goes a long way.

Just wondering how many of the anti-environmentalists here have a strong scientific background.....
Wow, you've got this down pat. What's your stake in this? You state exactly what all proponents say, lock step. There is enough countrary info to dispute what you say. I'm just not the one with the ability to do that. Regardless of who is funding the studies, the fact is there still is no absolute evidence that they are accurate. Easier for scientists to Prove gw is happening when they use the same models and stats over and over. The stats they use today were used in the nineties, in the nineties they used info from the eighties, as so on back. The original models and data were incorrect., yet are used and reused as a starting point today. Kinda like insanity if if one does the same thing over and over and get the same results. Gw people get the same results and make the same predictions over and over, and yet nothing happens! No warming, no permanent climate change! Yet when a contrary opinion is made, it is considered heresy because, quote, we have all the facts and know everything, unquote. Thus is fun, glad we don't all agree on everything, what a boring world this would be. Just remember, no matter which side is correct, if we end up under sharia law in the future, climate change will be a moot point.
__________________
avionstream is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 08:34 AM   #131
Rivet Master
 
kscherzi's Avatar
 
2013 27' FB International
El Dorado Hills , California
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,137
Images: 24
Sharia law? That came from nowhere!
__________________
kscherzi is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 08:39 AM   #132
Site Team
 
, Minnesota
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,940
Images: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by kscherzi View Post
Sharia law? That came from nowhere!
No, it's a common tactic when you run out of valid arguments and are losing.
__________________
markdoane is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 09:00 AM   #133
Rivet Master
 
J. Morgan's Avatar

 
1972 31' Sovereign
1975 31' Excella 500
Currently Looking...
Benton , Arkansas
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,046
Images: 11
Global Geological Climate Change... Conference

These posts are getting entirely too long, too many points being made in one breath.

My short answer to a multitude of questions is this.

If there was evidence that trace concentrations of CO2, in the amounts consistent with the current and projected future concentrations, are even capable of generating an increase in temperature then the theory would gain more traction in my thinking.

Fact is, there is no such practical and repeatable evidence available in the public domain. As such, the argument FOR AGW ALWAYS rests mostly on models and/or the so called temperature record which has arguably been manipulated.

People can say what they like, but fact is, AGW proponents have been caught manipulating data multiple times. If in fact the "evidence" supports their position, why the multiple manipulations?

Sorry, when a position constantly resorts to lies, I tend to suspect that it is untruthful.

Skepticism in the face of lies is not an adherence to "conspiracy theory", but instead it is good sense.

A good argument is built on a firm foundation of verifiable truths, not a floating arrangement of supposition and budding emotional rhetoric that asserts that the sky is falling.


Brevi tempore!
__________________
The fact that I am opinionated does not presuppose that I am wrong......

J. Morgan is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 10:07 AM   #134
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Nowhere , Somewhere
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,418
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by markdoane View Post
No, it's a common tactic when you run out of valid arguments and are losing.
Just trying to put this into perspective. If we lose our freedom, the climate will be a secondary concern to most of us, of course not according to our president.
__________________
avionstream is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 10:10 AM   #135
Rivet Master
 
cameront120's Avatar
 
1972 25' Tradewind
North Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,422
Images: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by avionstream View Post
Just trying to put this into perspective. If we lose our freedom, the climate will be a secondary concern to most of us, of course not according to our president.
How is this going to affect your freedom? And why do you think climate only impacts your country?
__________________
Cameron & the Labradors, Kai & Samm
North Vancouver, BC
Live! Life's a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death! - Mame Dennis
cameront120 is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 10:13 AM   #136
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Nowhere , Somewhere
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,418
Blog Entries: 2
The reference to sharia law in post 130 and and that some politicians think our loss of freedom to terrorists is secondary to climate change.
__________________
avionstream is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 10:15 AM   #137
Rivet Master
 
cameront120's Avatar
 
1972 25' Tradewind
North Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,422
Images: 23
Stop watching Fox news.
__________________
Cameron & the Labradors, Kai & Samm
North Vancouver, BC
Live! Life's a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death! - Mame Dennis
cameront120 is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 10:23 AM   #138
Rivet Master
 
Vintage Kin Owner
N/A , N/A
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 995
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by avionstream View Post
... Just remember, no matter which side is correct, if we end up under sharia law in the future, climate change will be a moot point.
The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" -- We must thank Thomas Jefferson for this. I don't think ANY religious law, whether Islamic, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, etc is going to be passed without violating this clause. Your worries are unwarranted, unless the constitution changes, and the chances of that happening is 0. We might as well worry about a meteor hitting the earth and ending life.
__________________
rostam is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 11:26 AM   #139
Rivet Master
 
Ray Eklund's Avatar

 
2014 25' International
2006 23' Safari SE
Currently Looking...
Boulder City , Nevada
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,369
I enjoy the long posts and other sites to visit. I am getting a diversified flood of information.

Anyone who watched the movie on Mozart... Amadeus... when he was told his music had "too many notes"... Mozart asked "which would you want me to remove?" Of course, his principal supporter had no clue.

The best any of us can do is our own small part in keeping our environment clean and conserve what we can, when we can. Those that throw out trash along the highway will continue to do so, even with signs that say it is illegal and fines of $1,000.

When forest fires occur on a clear day in California... I tell my wife... "a meteorite" did it. I suspect it human caused, but no body knows for sure. Then proving it is another problem.

The Earth is a speck of dust in the Universe. It is our responsibility to take our activities seriously enough to come, enjoy and leave it as you found it. It is the best we can do. Even if the majority care less.

Thank you for all of the generous taking of time to present your views on this and other issues. I am most comfortable climbing among the rocks that whisper to me their secrets. It gives me great comfort knowing that we are recording our presence on this Blue Globe with whatever is to become solid sedimentary rock in the distant future. No matter the outcome... we have left our mark.
__________________
Human Bean
Ray Eklund is offline  
Old 11-30-2015, 11:40 AM   #140
cwf
Rivet Master
 
cwf's Avatar
 
1999 34' Excella
Currently Looking...
Hillsboro , Texas
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,936
Images: 2
Would someone cut off the volcanoes, space debris (meteorites/ Mennonites?) and the fuel Wasted By our "leaders" on vacations and "summits"? Has any of them Heard of "online meetings"?
__________________

__________________
Peace and Blessings..
Channing
WBCCI# 30676
cwf is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Archeological, Geological, Historical and Public Sites- ABUSE Ray Eklund Off Topic Forum 12 05-06-2015 12:37 PM
West Geological Rockdocking Books for Travel Ray Eklund Boondocking 5 09-26-2009 06:47 PM
Desert Climate Meehan Full-Timing 9 05-25-2009 04:05 AM
Are there warm climate Airstream Parks on the East coast who sell lots chazols Our Community 11 08-17-2004 07:04 PM
conference room whistler Our Community 0 02-17-2004 07:57 PM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.