Global warming.

[level.eleven]

As the proud owner of a Bachelor's in Biology and a Master's in Environmental Science, I never did understand the concern with warming trends when compared to the fallout of cooling trends. Cooling periods are so much more devastating and consequential. We should considered ourselves blessed if we could get a warming period instead of a cooling period. People think energy prices are high now?

Why are you a real estate jockey, then? Is it a quiverfull instance?

In addition, you should also know what happens when too much co2 is diffused into a system. Remember, we broke the 400 ppm mark.

 

[smokingman]

Why are you a real estate jockey, then? Is it a quiverfull instance?

In addition, you should also know what happens when too much co2 is diffused into a system. Remember, we broke the 400 ppm mark.

Earth's atmosphere today contains about 400 ppm CO2 (0.040%). Compared to former geologic times,our present atmosphere,like the Late Carboniferous atmosphere, is CO2- impoverished! In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 450 ppm.

Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya -- 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period ).

The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were theonly geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.

 

[beararms1776]

Good news folks! I checked the extended/ projected forecast for this whole month. Not one day was above 85 deg.

 

[Classic]

Earth's atmosphere today contains about 400 ppm CO2 (0.040%). Compared to former geologic times,our present atmosphere,like the Late Carboniferous atmosphere, is CO2- impoverished! In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 450 ppm.

Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya -- 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period ).

The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were theonly geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.

OMG - you are trying to confuse the Green Left with FACTS. How cruel and unfair.

 

[churchmouse]

Why are you a real estate jockey, then? Is it a quiverfull instance?

In addition, you should also know what happens when too much co2 is diffused into a system. Remember, we broke the 400 ppm mark.

Please read post #462

 

[churchmouse]

Well, yer humor meter is definitely broken.

Yeah...wife said the same thing today. I need to adjust/work on that.

 

[88GT]

Yeah...wife said the same thing today. I need to adjust/work on that.

Aw, just having fun at your expense.

Incidentally, since it seems someone wants to call in to question my life choices, my answer to you is this: NYFB

 

[indiucky]

OMG - you are trying to confuse the Green Left with FACTS. How cruel and unfair.

They HATE those!!!!

 

[92ThoStro]

level.eleven, we learned about that point in Geology 107! 107!!!!!! And it actually provides negative support for the whole idea of human influenced climate change leading to Global Warming. So what was the point in bringing that up?

As far as the degree goes. I jumped off of Environmental Science for now in favor of Criminal Justice and Public Administration. Have you looked at how many people actually go into a field directly related to their degree? It is incredibly low.

 

[Bunnykid68]

69 degrees in Evansville right now in the middle of JUne, damn it's hot outside

 

[churchmouse]

Aw, just having fun at your expense.

Incidentally, since it seems someone wants to call in to question my life choices, my answer to you is this: NYFB

 

[BigMatt]

69 degrees in Evansville right now in the middle of JUne, damn it's hot outside

When it is hot/stormy, you can advance their agenda.

When it is cool/snowy, "Weather isn't climate.".

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/it's-weather,-not-climate.aspx

 

[ghuns]

That's because they think that since they drive Priuses...

Is it Priuses or is it Prii? This is the debate we should be having.

What is the plural of Prius?

 

[ultra...good]

Global warming is an SOB. It was so cold this past year i put the motorcycle away in early October and did not get it back out until late April. Oh wait, im sorry, thats not global warming, that mist be climate change. Silly me. I need to keep up on these things.

 

[BigMatt]

I am a member of the Alliance for Responsible for Atmospheric Policy. It is an industry led policy shaping group of chemical/refrigerant industry stakeholders.

We got word that the White House has gotten China to agree to an amendment of the Montreal Protocol which is a treaty that was originally meant to phase out ozone depleting substances (ODS).

This means that the EPA is modifying a treaty that was designed to eliminate ODS into a treaty that will eliminate refrigerants that act as greenhouse gasses.

Since they would never get congressional approval for a new treaty, they are bypassing congressional approval for a new international treaty and modifying an existing treaty to serve their purposes.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Here's the thing about global warming; It doesn't really matter if you believe it or not. If it does exist, and if it is happening, and if human activity is causing it, there is no way we can stop it anyway. If it could be proved that humans have caused it, that would not in any way prove that humans could stop doing the things that caused it. We think that because most of those we know seem to be reasonable and smart, that all we would need is to get the word out. It doesn't work that way. This force called human nature is an unstoppable force. For every one reasonable, smart person on this earth who would conserve, recycle, save, respect, reuse, there are ten thousand who won't. We Americans think we're pretty smart; we almost invented the "green" movement. We have green this and green that, hybrid cars, biodegradable bags, efficient furnaces, on and on. Yet, the American culture continues to be the most voracious consuming machine this world has ever seen. We make little incremental changes and we sit back so pleased with ourselves. So, keep up this "political" argument if you want to. But if it’s going to happen, it’s going to happen, and none of us really has any say in the matter.

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

Global warming is an SOB. It was so cold this past year i put the motorcycle away in early October and did not get it back out until late April. Oh wait, im sorry, thats not global warming, that mist be climate change. Silly me. I need to keep up on these things.

Thats weird ... I was wearing t-shirts in Nov/Dec. Global warming OR climate change?

 

[jamil]

Here's the thing about global warming; It doesn't really matter if you believe it or not. If it does exist, and if it is happening, and if human activity is causing it, there is no way we can stop it anyway. If it could be proved that humans have caused it, that would not in any way prove that humans could stop doing the things that caused it. We think that because most of those we know seem to be reasonable and smart, that all we would need is to get the word out. It doesn't work that way. This force called human nature is an unstoppable force. For every one reasonable, smart person on this earth who would conserve, recycle, save, respect, reuse, there are ten thousand who won't. We Americans think we're pretty smart; we almost invented the "green" movement. We have green this and green that, hybrid cars, biodegradable bags, efficient furnaces, on and on. Yet, the American culture continues to be the most voracious consuming machine this world has ever seen. We make little incremental changes and we sit back so pleased with ourselves. So, keep up this "political" argument if you want to. But if it’s going to happen, it’s going to happen, and none of us really has any say in the matter.

Any argument where the wining side gets to set policy is a political argument. It just is. And this argument is not one-sided. Please don't pretend that you're on the non-political side.

It's also economic. "Green" is disastrous if you're on the wrong side of "green" policy. But the side that gets richest is the side that gets to set the policy. Just ask Al Gore, the environmental whore, where he's made the most money.

 

[rhino]

I am a member of the Alliance for Responsible for Atmospheric Policy. It is an industry led policy shaping group of chemical/refrigerant industry stakeholders.

We got word that the White House has gotten China to agree to an amendment of the Montreal Protocol which is a treaty that was originally meant to phase out ozone depleting substances (ODS).

Wow! They're still pushing the ozone depletion hysteria?? Wow.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Wow! They're still pushing the ozone depletion hysteria?? Wow.

They could push something useful, like stupidity depletion--of course they would have to ban themselves after doing so.