The explanation that "it's normal" and "it's always been this way" is far more obvious and makes far more sense. But you're welcome to your religion of Gaia, just don't ask me to feed your collection plate.
On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 10:37:02 -0400, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
I doubt anybody who knows you would ever expect anything from you. You're a self centred ahole and always have been.
maintain them.
No, they only see that little ice shelf breaking off and cry wolf. They see the glaciers receding but don't pay attention to others which have grown and expanded. They're in their own little world, and God help anyone who tries to point them in a logical direction.
-- If you're trying to take a roomful of people by surprise, it's a lot easier to hit your targets if you don't yell going through the door. -- Lois McMaster Bujold
Wow! Now there's a pot. Ever look in a mirror?
======================================== The reason it does not make sense to you is that you are looking at it all wrong. Real science, logic and reason have no place in any conversation about global warming. Now, throw all that out and say 15 hail Al Gores as penence.
>
================================================================================ Think it's bad now? Wait until they figure out that it is caused by our orbit. There will be people saying that we need to build rockets to push the earth back into a comfortable orbit.
=============================================================
Agreed.
Han wrote in news:XnsA08450780FE97ikkezelf@216.151.153.55:
I wouldn't. I'd hope they would drop those stations from the earlier calculations too.
I don't trust this bunch *at all* to apply a correction factor honestly -- remember that they've already been caught at least once applying "correction factors" when the actual data didn't support their preordained conclusions.
There are; see
That's correct. And when temperature monitoring stations are right next to blacktop surfaces
Dave wrote in news:04c1v7p05eacj329fc3af82m3r2b4n6gkk@
4ax.com:
The earth receives more energy from the sun in *one hour* than human beings consume in an *entire year*. That's about five orders of magnitude.
Utah's got a dozen fire going, most of them fueled by grasses and other small plants that grew in abundance during last year when precipitation was high and temperatures mild, that turned into tinderboxes this year when precipitation was low and temperatures high. Some of them were ignited by lightning, others by human stupidity. I'm just saying that's not the result of forest mismanagement. All of which has nothing to do with nonexistent man-made climate change.
=============================================================
Agreed. ==============================================================
I should have snipped the first sentence in the statement I was responding to.
Nope. If tobacco was the cause then everybody who smoked would get cancer. It's not a cause, it's a predisposing factor. George Burns was seldom seen without a cigar and lived to be over a hundred. If "smoking causes cancer" he would certainly have gotten cancer. There are many other examples of people who smoke heavily and live to ripe old ages and never get cancer.
Prove that it was caused by fracking. Pennsylvania had high methane levels in the water long before fracking. Heck, prove that the various videos that are being shown are even tap water. For all you know there could be a gasoline tank on the other side of the wall.
climate than the
Global warming theorists (NOT me) claim that carbon dioxide acts as an energy trap that lowers the amount of solar energy that re-radiates back into space, that it's this increased retention of solar energy that is killing all the polar bears. Personally, I think that even if the globe was warming ( and I don't think it is, at least not significantly, and if it is, it's not caused by man), on a global scale it would probably be a good thing. More energy inevitably would result in increased plant growth, which would feed more animals as well. On a global scale it would be worth it to push beachfront property farther inland in return for a global environment that's more hospitable to life in general.
Just Wondering wrote in news:4ff29df3$0$10576$882e7ee2 @usenet-news.net:
Yeah, about that -- polar bear population is actually *increasing*, not decreasing.
Talk to any geologist, and he'll tell you that during much of its existence, the planet has been much warmer than it is now. Too many people make the mistake of thinking that the conditions we experience now are necessarily both normal and optimal, without any evidence for either belief.
climate than the
Careful there Doug, you are using common sense and that is not so common any more.
Yes no one has proven that warming is a bad thing. But we have had abundant proof that the suggestion of global warming is a gold mine of opportunity to sell the next save the world idea.
Let us sell you "something" so that your share of the foot print, (.0000000000000000000000000000000001%), will decrease by the same amount. Much to do about nothing.
Looooooooooooooooooooong before there was any type of forest management there was "no forest management". There have always been wild fires.
Look at the earth from the moon. Can you see any of the direct physical structures or constructions "changes by man". Noooo.
Can you see the land and sea? yes
Can you now see how insignificant we are to the whole picture?
================================================================================
The government can't take on that task in the foreseeable future. Even the elected cannot fathom adding 3 more zero's to the word trillion.
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 06:48:34 -0500, Leon
climate than the
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the pollution produced by man and his use of fossil fuels.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.