Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by FootbalYouBet » Wed May 07, 2014 1:18 am

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2 ... t/8736743/

It is not a hoax. Unnatural climate change is happening due mainly, if not only, to human activity in this world, on this planet. Our kids, grandkids, great grandkids, are going to go through hell on earth from nature, because we did not get it, and get it long time ago, and do something along time ago

This really makes me see red, red, red. :x :x :x :x :x

Those of us suffering the least from this may have to defend ourselves and our land against those who are suffering the worst. Other countries want BC farmland. Someday, things will be so bad elsewhere, they will come with guns.
Live well and please God

FYB has left the building
User avatar
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 17525
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:51 pm
Location: Delta BC

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by Massdestruction » Wed May 07, 2014 10:06 am

Understand your concern FYB, however there is little you or I can do about the brown cloud hanging over India and China!

I read an article in the Toronto star back in the late 70,s that said Russia was developing weather altering tech, as part of their cold war efforts against the USA. ???

After the winter we just had I thought global warming would be a non topic! :roll:
All-Star
 
Posts: 4281
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 1:32 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by TravelPatB » Wed May 07, 2014 6:50 pm

That carbon impact is going up still in places like India and China is a problem but is to be expected with the rate of growth in their economies over that time. Yes it is a problem their carbon footprint is going up and indeed China is responsible for over 20% of all greenhouse gasses humans produce but they certainly are aware of the problem and taking steps to curb their impact. China right now is buy far the biggest spender on developing renewable sources of energy in the world and their per capita carbon impact in 2010 was still WAY LOWER per person in China and India than it is here and in the USA.

In the units they measure these things Annual carbon dioxide emissions [tonnes] per capita) the Canadian per capita impact in 1990 was 16.2, by 2010 we had only reduced that to 15.3. The USA still worse than us but improving faster than us. They went from 19.1 to 17.2 per capita. Here are some other countries and you can see our record as Canadians is shameful in this area with how high our per capita impact is.

Country --------- 1990 ---- 2010
Canada ---------- 16.2 ---- 15.3
USA ------------- 19.1 ---- 17.2
China ------------ 2.2 ----- 7.6
India ------------- 0.8 ---- 1.6
Germany ------- 12.0 ------ 9.6
Russia ---------- 14.0 ----- 11.6

So clearly Canadians have work to do if we truly care about the planet we are leaving behind.
All-Star
 
Posts: 7507
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:35 pm
Location: Hamilton

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by depopulationINC » Wed May 07, 2014 11:02 pm

Massdestruction wrote:Understand your concern FYB, however there is little you or I can do about the brown cloud hanging over India and China!

I read an article in the Toronto star back in the late 70,s that said Russia was developing weather altering tech, as part of their cold war efforts against the USA. ???

After the winter we just had I thought global warming would be a non topic! :roll:


One person can do something about it...stop buying stuff from countries with low to no environmental protection policies. Coincidentally, most of those are also the ones that push sweat shop labor, so it is a double win.

As for weather manipulation...it has been happening for years. Australia is well known for cloud bursting to fill reservoirs. Basically, they seed clouds, and those clouds fill the water where they want it. The result is that the clouds do not travel inland, and there are areas where rain used to be a common occurrence, and it is now a rarity. It was officially sanctioned about a decade ago, and was supposed to run as a 5 year test, but was extended another 5 and is openly still permitted.

Ever hear of the Weather Warfare Treaty ratified by the UN in 1977? What about the Environmental Modification Convention adopted in 1976? There are a variety of weather manipulation treaties out there, and basically, they make it a no no to attempt weather manipulation to attack people, while others ban the use of weather manipulation across international boards. Anyways, a few years back the US started petitioning for modifications to those treaties, which would allow manipulation in international waters. This all seems of good intent...the ideal is to burst weather fronts and prevent hurricanes and such from destroying mainland coasts. Great idea...the technology is there or in development...still scary as hell though. Fact is, there has been firm documentation of deliberate weather manipulation for well over 60 years.
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 9453
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:21 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by cfleskfan » Fri May 09, 2014 1:06 pm

Whether or not we agree on the degree of human effect on climate change, we should be cogniscent of our stewardship of the planet. Scientists can't come to concensus on how much climate change is caused by man, how can we expect concensus amongst the masses. There was a report put out the other day that stated less than half of climate change was caused by humans, yet the for profit groups continue to capitalize on the flocks willing to believe anything provided that it is coming from their side.

The simple fact is that whether or not we believe in climate change, taking steps to protect our environment is a good thing and if everybody takes steps to reduce harmful emmissions, whether they are CO2 or other polutants, we are all winners.

I wish though that the arguments on either side of the equation were fact based and not profit based.
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 3974
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:29 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by ro1313 » Fri May 09, 2014 1:34 pm

10,000 years ago...All of Canada and most of the US was under a mile of ice....It melted as the planet warmed

Must have been some wicked cars those cavemen were driving

And that video offered ZERO proof of anything.

They say the planet is warming yet we just had and are stiil having one of the coldest winters on record....

Then there was the 70ies where scientists were saying we were heading towards another ice age....which is it?
Last edited by ro1313 on Fri May 09, 2014 1:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 20374
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:14 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by MadJack » Fri May 09, 2014 1:39 pm

Careful ro, the fundamentalist Christians will tell you the world was only created some 6,000 years ago.

But your point remains valid.
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 12215
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 2:37 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by depopulationINC » Fri May 09, 2014 1:49 pm

ro1313 wrote:10,000 years ago...All of Canada and most of the US was under a mile of ice....It melted as the planet warmed

Must have been some wicked cars those cavemen were driving



fyi...Global climate change and global warming are far from the same term. The number one driver in global climate change is the chemical composition shifting of the oceans, and that is purely man made. Weather patterns themselves are cyclical.

example...Centuries ago, the British climate was warm enough that there is documentation of many vineyards. The climate was warm enough to allow that across the land mass, and it is not now it is not....the region is in fact cooler with a shorter growing season now.
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 9453
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:21 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by DAN38 » Fri May 09, 2014 2:44 pm

cfleskfan wrote:Whether or not we agree on the degree of human effect on climate change, we should be cogniscent of our stewardship of the planet. Scientists can't come to concensus on how much climate change is caused by man, how can we expect concensus amongst the masses. There was a report put out the other day that stated less than half of climate change was caused by humans, yet the for profit groups continue to capitalize on the flocks willing to believe anything provided that it is coming from their side.

The simple fact is that whether or not we believe in climate change, taking steps to protect our environment is a good thing and if everybody takes steps to reduce harmful emmissions, whether they are CO2 or other polutants, we are all winners.

I wish though that the arguments on either side of the equation were fact based and not profit based.


This is an excellent post. ro1313 is bang on too.... There was panic in Europe as the year 1000 AD approached. Similar end of the world fear in 1999. We were supposed to run out of oil in the 70s. The propaganda machine was at full throttle for that one. Anyone else remember the papers, radio and TV warnings on how we should all stop driving cars ? I'm not saying we aren't affecting the planet, although I doubt it's to the degree the alarmists are spewing, what I do say is that we don't have enough data to confirm we are affecting anything. We don't know the climate from even 200 yrs ago because nobody knew how to record temps or even if they should at all. We just don't know enough.
Si vis pacem... para bellum
All-Star
 
Posts: 4204
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:50 am

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by cfleskfan » Fri May 09, 2014 3:15 pm

DAN38 wrote:
cfleskfan wrote:Whether or not we agree on the degree of human effect on climate change, we should be cogniscent of our stewardship of the planet. Scientists can't come to concensus on how much climate change is caused by man, how can we expect concensus amongst the masses. There was a report put out the other day that stated less than half of climate change was caused by humans, yet the for profit groups continue to capitalize on the flocks willing to believe anything provided that it is coming from their side.

The simple fact is that whether or not we believe in climate change, taking steps to protect our environment is a good thing and if everybody takes steps to reduce harmful emmissions, whether they are CO2 or other polutants, we are all winners.

I wish though that the arguments on either side of the equation were fact based and not profit based.


This is an excellent post. ro1313 is bang on too.... There was panic in Europe as the year 1000 AD approached. Similar end of the world fear in 1999. We were supposed to run out of oil in the 70s. The propaganda machine was at full throttle for that one. Anyone else remember the papers, radio and TV warnings on how we should all stop driving cars ? I'm not saying we aren't affecting the planet, although I doubt it's to the degree the alarmists are spewing, what I do say is that we don't have enough data to confirm we are affecting anything. We don't know the climate from even 200 yrs ago because nobody knew how to record temps or even if they should at all. We just don't know enough.


Accoring to NASA the number one driver for global climate change is the sun. They go on to say that man is the number one culprit for the increase in CO2 based emissions, which needs to be addressed at all levels. I trust NASA scientists a bit more than the ones employed by Gore or Suzuki. That still does not mean that we should not do our part. It's like the little girl walking the beach with her grandfather and she bends down to pick up a starfish being baked by the sun and throws it back in the water. The grandfather tells her that there are millions of starfish stranded on the beach and we can't help all of them, to which the girl replies "but I helped that one".

I just think the Chicken Little crowd would have a lot more credibility if their solutions amounted to a bit more than "give me your money if you want to stop climate change", then flying their private jet home.
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 3974
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:29 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by DAN38 » Fri May 09, 2014 3:25 pm

And maybe that starfish had spent the last few months getting to that exact spot on the beach to spawn. When the little girl threw it back into the deeper water, it's eggs did not hatch and so by not knowing enough, she killed hundreds or more future starfish. We don't know enough !!!
Si vis pacem... para bellum
All-Star
 
Posts: 4204
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:50 am

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by Massdestruction » Fri May 09, 2014 3:58 pm

depopulationINC wrote:
Massdestruction wrote:Understand your concern FYB, however there is little you or I can do about the brown cloud hanging over India and China!

I read an article in the Toronto star back in the late 70,s that said Russia was developing weather altering tech, as part of their cold war efforts against the USA. ???

After the winter we just had I thought global warming would be a non topic! :roll:


One person can do something about it...stop buying stuff from countries with low to no environmental protection policies. Coincidentally, most of those are also the ones that push sweat shop labor, so it is a double win.

As for weather manipulation...it has been happening for years. Australia is well known for cloud bursting to fill reservoirs. Basically, they seed clouds, and those clouds fill the water where they want it. The result is that the clouds do not travel inland, and there are areas where rain used to be a common occurrence, and it is now a rarity. It was officially sanctioned about a decade ago, and was supposed to run as a 5 year test, but was extended another 5 and is openly still permitted.

Ever hear of the Weather Warfare Treaty ratified by the UN in 1977? What about the Environmental Modification Convention adopted in 1976? There are a variety of weather manipulation treaties out there, and basically, they make it a no no to attempt weather manipulation to attack people, while others ban the use of weather manipulation across international boards. Anyways, a few years back the US started petitioning for modifications to those treaties, which would allow manipulation in international waters. This all seems of good intent...the ideal is to burst weather fronts and prevent hurricanes and such from destroying mainland coasts. Great idea...the technology is there or in development...still scary as hell though. Fact is, there has been firm documentation of deliberate weather manipulation for well over 60 years.



Thanks for the info D, So, Climate change or Weather Manipulation Tech?
All-Star
 
Posts: 4281
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 1:32 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by Massdestruction » Fri May 09, 2014 4:03 pm

TravelPatB wrote:That carbon impact is going up still in places like India and China is a problem but is to be expected with the rate of growth in their economies over that time. Yes it is a problem their carbon footprint is going up and indeed China is responsible for over 20% of all greenhouse gasses humans produce but they certainly are aware of the problem and taking steps to curb their impact. China right now is buy far the biggest spender on developing renewable sources of energy in the world and their per capita carbon impact in 2010 was still WAY LOWER per person in China and India than it is here and in the USA.

In the units they measure these things Annual carbon dioxide emissions [tonnes] per capita) the Canadian per capita impact in 1990 was 16.2, by 2010 we had only reduced that to 15.3. The USA still worse than us but improving faster than us. They went from 19.1 to 17.2 per capita. Here are some other countries and you can see our record as Canadians is shameful in this area with how high our per capita impact is.

Country --------- 1990 ---- 2010
Canada ---------- 16.2 ---- 15.3
USA ------------- 19.1 ---- 17.2
China ------------ 2.2 ----- 7.6
India ------------- 0.8 ---- 1.6
Germany ------- 12.0 ------ 9.6
Russia ---------- 14.0 ----- 11.6

So clearly Canadians have work to do if we truly care about the planet we are leaving behind.



Per Capitra, still means you have to multiply Chinas by what 7 billion to our 30 million!

We have had emission laws in effect for decades and don't even burn coal at all!!

Your stats are very misleading about the actual countries who are doing the most damage, that we have no control over!
All-Star
 
Posts: 4281
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 1:32 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by ro1313 » Fri May 09, 2014 4:05 pm

depopulationINC wrote:
ro1313 wrote:10,000 years ago...All of Canada and most of the US was under a mile of ice....It melted as the planet warmed

Must have been some wicked cars those cavemen were driving



fyi...Global climate change and global warming are far from the same term. .



Yes I know that..
Yet both terms were used in the report as if they were the same thing

That said. Your point does not dispute the fact that the planet warms and cools naturally
User avatar
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 20374
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:14 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by TravelPatB » Fri May 09, 2014 4:18 pm

Man - some of you have bought hook line and sinker into those 3% of scientists reports - almost all funded by big oil that get published over and over and over again mainly in Murdoch owned newspapers or media organizations that depend on a lot of oil related money for advertising dollars. Reports that are in such a minority position that we should rarely hear about them but instead we hear more about them than the 97% of scientific reports and the OVERWHELMING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS of the situation we are at today. Much of that discussed here.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... ges-denial

Minority reports that keep repeating the same lies - such as misrepresenting NASA's actual position on this, or repeating that lie that most scientists felt we were in a cooling age in the 1970's as a way of trying to discredit all those who actually study this thing - the vast majority of whom do NOT have a commercial interest (like Big Oil). And FYI - in the 70's media exploited a handful of MINORITY scientific reports with Ice Age scare headlines. The reality though is as of 1970 - 6 times as many climate scientists were predicting waarming compared to those predicting cooling who happened to get a lot of media attention. Of 68 Scientific Studies on studies of Global temperature trends done by major climate science organizaztions from 1965 - 1979 - 62% predicted warming, 10% predicted cooling and 28% took no stance. But those denying climate change certainly won't tell you that. It doesn't fit their agenda.

This from NASA's website - It's reasonable to assume that changes in the sun's energy output would cause the climate to change, since the sun is the fundamental source of energy that drives our climate system.

Indeed, studies show that solar variability has played a role in past climate changes. For example, a decrease in solar activity is thought to have triggered the Little Ice Age between approximately 1650 and 1850, when Greenland was largely cut off by ice from 1410 to the 1720s and glaciers advanced in the Alps.

But several lines of evidence show that current global warming cannot be explained by changes in energy from the sun:

Since 1750, the average amount of energy coming from the Sun either remained constant or increased slightly.
If the warming were caused by a more active sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gasses are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.
Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases.


Or maybe this might convince some - a graph on NASA's website under the banner headline
" Consensus: 97% of climate scientists agree"
Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities,1and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
All-Star
 
Posts: 7507
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:35 pm
Location: Hamilton

Next

Users browsing this forum: KevinRiley2 and 10 guests