Global Geological Climate Change... Conference

[Tincampers]

I propose steps 1 and 2 to begin the reversal of climate change.

1: Ban all private jets and other type of private aircraft used by politicians.

2: Ban all limousines and other private conveyances used by politicians.

Let them all use public transportation to attend these conferences.

[J. Morgan]

I scanned many of the flood articles posted, if one of them has a practical and repeatable demonstration proving that CO2 in trace amounts is capable of influencing heat converted and retained please post it here.

My quick scan of the articles did not reveal any such data, but only projections of belief of what it is "gonna do".


Brevi tempore!

[J. Morgan]

Originally Posted by mrprez

I propose steps 1 and 2 to begin the reversal of climate change.

1: Ban all private jets and other type of private aircraft used by politicians.

2: Ban all limousines and other private conveyances used by politicians.

Let them all use public transportation to attend these conferences.

Well, that would not be fair at all and would diminish the stature of those chosen to lord over all of us regular people!


Brevi tempore!

[J. Morgan]

Originally Posted by J. Morgan

Well, that would not be fair at all and would diminish the stature of those chosen to lord over all of us regular people!

These leaders are very important people, the best of the best no doubt, who have earned their special privilege!

Brevi tempore!

(Well I roasted that edit)


Brevi tempore!

[Tincampers]

Originally Posted by J. Morgan

Well, that would not be fair at all and would diminish the stature of those chosen to lord over all of us regular people!


Brevi tempore!

Yes, I realize now that I was being unfair and harmful to our esteemed leaders massive egos. I retract my proposal and submit a new first 2 step list.

1: Ban all private conveyances for anyone who is NOT a politician

2: Let those who are NOT politicians revert to a life of the 1800s.

[kscherzi]

By and large what's now called man made climate change used to be called air pollution. Maybe some of you recall the terrible smog in the major cities back in the 1960s and 70s. The sky's were brown and breathing was difficult. That's mostly cleared up now after smart scientist and engineers discovered the cause and found effective solutions, namely pollution controls for vehicles and use of superior computation technology such as fuel injection.

Remember the ozone layer? A complete loss would have been very serious. Life on earth would have been vastly less diverse. Again smart scientists figured out the culprit, a simple unintended chemical reaction between high altitude ozone and a man made chemical compound. Worldwide leadership worked together to make changes that changed course to a solution.

Both times plenty of naysayers but facts are facts, and today nobody is complaining too loudly about still being alive.

Not saying everybody should discard their Airstream and vehicles and move to a urban condo above a transit center with three roommates and share a bicycle and become a vegetarian. But think about it. This is where some policy makers are headed, and they intend to force this change by making fossil fuels very expensive.

What lifestyle do you wish for your children and grandchildren. For my part I use solar, not a generator for power. I tow at 55 to 60 to minimize fuel burn, and don't move the trailer too often, instead use it as a home base. I also mostly cut out meat, but mostly for health reasons.

[J. Morgan]

Say they were right about the ozone layer.

At the heart of the destruction of the ozone layer was the notion that trace fluorocarbons were capable of destroying trace ozone via catalytic process where one fluorocarbon molecule was capable of destroying perhaps 10,000 ozone atoms.

I could look at the argument proposed and know that if this catalytic process was factual, I could look at the argument and see that it made sense.

AGW has no like foundation of hard science.

The cleaning of car exhaust into the early 90s got car emissions 98% clean compared to the1960s, the lengths we have gone since are extraneous in my opinion.

There is a point of diminishing returns with regard to cost/benefit.


Brevi tempore!

[J. Morgan]

In the case of ozone destruction, an argument with a base of catalytic destruction of ozone was a point of origin from which the argument was based, no such foundation was lain for AGW, just an unproven assertion of the power of trace CO2 to drive temperature.


Brevi tempore!

[Ultradog]

Originally Posted by mrprez

I propose steps 1 and 2 to begin the reversal of climate change.

1: Ban all private jets and other type of private aircraft used by politicians.

2: Ban all limousines and other private conveyances used by politicians.

Let them all use public transportation to attend these conferences.

Of course one would need to ban second houses, more than a couple pairs of shoes, thermostats that can be turned up over 68 degrees, fishing boats, snomobiles, pro sports games and stadiums, Airstreams, toys, makeup, sexy clothing, more than a 2000 calorie/day intake, personal transportation televisions, lawn mowers, and a huge list of other things that are unnecessary for general survival.
Right?

[Tincampers]

Yes, but you forgot to number them.

[J. Morgan]

Actually, in order to save the earth, we must eliminate all metabolic process, all oxidation, and all photosynthesis. As rocks and minerals are the "first owners" of planet earth, we need to do our part to restore the earth to its prior state before living plants, creatures, and microbes ruined it.

It is going to be a big project, but I am sure the goal can be accomplished if we work together as if we are of one mind.


Brevi tempore!

[Tincampers]

Originally Posted by J. Morgan

Actually, in order to save the earth, we must eliminate all metabolic process, all oxidation, and all photosynthesis. As rocks and minerals are the "first owners" of planet earth, we need to do our part to restore the earth to its prior state before living plants, creatures, and microbes ruined it.

It is going to be a big project, but I am sure the goal can be accomplished if we work together as if we are of one mind.


Brevi tempore!

Now we're talking.

[xrvr]

The same type of technology that cleaned up car emissions has been used to clean coal fired plants. Yet even though they can be clean, the climate change people still want them eliminated. That's where the politics comes on. Auto standards embraced ten years ago as being all we need are now being touted as not good enough. In the seventys we were told the cuyahoga river was burning and would never be clean, Lake Erie would never support fish again and we would all be long since dead by the end of the century. Mother Nature has a way of cleansing herself with a little bit of help from us. The standards set to clean up the lake worked, so why do we continually see stiffer standards.? Why? Because it isn't enough to stop polution, you must punish those respnsible even if they were operating under the govt regs set at that time. That's how the climate change people think. We can use coal safely now but because the coal industry must be punished none of us can benefit from it. But it's okay to ship it from Canada to other countries along with oil. Bring the US back to pre industrial revolution days while the rest if the world profits because of our political leaders decisions all in the name of climate change.

[BoldAdventure]

Ban people. That's the problem.

[J. Morgan]

Oh come on!

Politicians would never hijack and nurture a "grass roots" movement to make money and solidify their power and control by tugging at their subordinates heartstrings.

That is just silly talk. I am not going to just sit here while people run down our fine upstanding and loyal politicians.

They love us and only want what is best for us. If we reject their teachings and edicts, well, we will have to suffer their wrath.

On behalf of the collective,
Brevi tempore!
Over and out!

[xrvr]

Oh, yea!

[jcl]

Originally Posted by avionstream

Because your links are all connected to the flawed studies by the same interconnected groups that have a political agenda. Almost all the studies are done by the UN or other political agency's. The scientists must come up with the prearranged conclusions or have there funding cut off. This is a fact. Follow the politics from the universities on up to the federally govt and the UN. Lockstep. Studies done by nongovernmental connected organizations are generally ignored out of hand. Why? Someone doesntvwant the pot stirred or the truth to come out. Yes, oil companies have a vested interest in climate change studies, financially. But govt funded studies have a politically vested interest, world domination through legislation based on false assumptions. And the polis are winning!!

If the only tool available is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

If one has already decided that everything is a government plot, then everything will look like it was created by those with an agenda, whether that be anthropogenic climate change or whatever.

Look to the science. If you like, look to the studies funded by the oil companies. Those studies came to clear conclusions. And then some oil companies decided it was in their business interests to create doubt, and so stopped funding research, and started funded groups designed solely to create that doubt, and thus extend the period in which they could apply their then current business model. Don't fall for it.

[J. Morgan]

Yea, because historically evil corporations are the parties that have caused the most harm in this world, certainly not politicians.

Corporations really wont pay "carbon taxes", it will be consumers and producers that finance the political cut of energy markets.

The taxes wont change the behavior of the rich and powerful, but it will place a heavy burden on the working poor of the world.




Brevi tempore!

[tevake]

[QUOTE=avionstream;1716900]The same type of technology that cleaned up car emissions has been used to clean coal fired plants. Yet even though they can be clean, the climate change people still want them eliminated. That's where the politics comes on. Auto standards embraced ten years ago as being all we need are now being touted as not good enough.


Very hard to remove to politics from subjects like these. But above you outlined a couple that are not as simple as it might seem.

In the first days of president George W Bush's period in office. It was decided to relax both the clean air act requiring that our coal fired generating plants implement these cleaning and scrubbing measures that you mention. This because it was too expensive for the power companies to do.

Also it was decided to roll back CAFE standards on new cars. Requiring them to meet lower emissions standards. And and better MPG performance.

In the time since those decisions as far as I know the power companies have been very slow in installing these improvements that would let the U S safely use its abundant and inexpensive coal supplies. So as you say these plants can be set up to run more cleanly but have not chosen to do so.

As far as the choice to roll back CAFE standards for our Auto industry.
They continued to roll out the same olde. Thirsty beasts they had been producing for years. While makers in other parts of the world were engineering and building much more modern smaller, and way more fuel efficient product. As a result the U S auto industry almost stalled its self into total insolvency. What that required to turn around we all remember.
How many millions of cars have been added to the worlds roads in the last Ten years?

Our industry Board Rooms are responsive to their share holders and this years bottom line. Making it hard to spend now to do better in the long run.
Hence the need for outside pressure to compel them to to do what is needed in the long run.
I'm hopping down from the soapbox now, next.

Cheers Richard

[Ray Eklund]

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. The oldest Indian Artifacts found in North America... are under the ocean along the coast. Date the site of these Paleolithic sites and you can compute the melting of the ice from the last of four major advances. Which.. by the way extended down to the Missouri River in Missouri. The river is the product of the edge of the melting ice. Shown by sediments, the ice edges been thousands of feet thick. The furthest advance of the last Ice Age. There are shelves of books on this subject by Geologists, Archaeologists, Paleontologists, Glacial Scientists... not one Climate Scientist. None of this falls into the Climate Scientist's... research.

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.

Imagine the pollution 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?

Dare I even bring up Human Evolution and Darwin?

Depleted ground water....? This is not Global Warming... it is consumption. Much of this ground water is the result of the Pleistocene ice melt.

We are a product of evolution on this planet. We are more likely to destroy ourselves by killing one another over beliefs, than facts. Since the beginning of life on Earth, life has flourished and went extinct when you would expected the most dominant species would go on forever. We are products of these changes in life forms and the migration out of Africa during the last Ice Age. We are recent in geologic history. The horse has us beat by 45,000,000 years and they should be traveling in Airstreams, not us.

What is our future? Not yours or mine to decide. Eventually change will occur to balance the eco system. One virus... mutating to another and then to another will most likely be our demise. Not an overheated planet. Humans are a vulnerable species. We can adapt to changes in our environment, but our success story is only temporary.

This is OFF TOPIC, more of a melding of the great variety of personal experiences of those on this Forum. I have a neighbor who believes the Earth is 10,000 years old according to the Bible. I knew a Sioux Indian along the North and South Dakota border that believed that spiders made flint arrowheads you find. I know people who when you show them a Fossil 38,000,000 Mesohippus (an ancestor to the modern horse)... they do not want to see it, as it conflicts with their beliefs.

Discussion is good, but you have to play fair. The losers ask questions to debate, but never offer much in fact. My points can be researched and the evidence is there in your back yard, or mine. Just because it is convenient to ignore what you see... does not make your position right.