Tell that to the Iranians.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Most people don't understand the difference, no question about that.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
Climate changes. That's what it does.
Nobody can stop it. Griddle stays hot a long time after you turn off the burner. Even if you could turn off the burner, which can't be done, it will have to burn itself out.
Idiotic anthrocentric arrogance, thinking humans can control global changes!
Climate changes. That's what it does.
Nobody can stop it. Griddle stays hot a long time after you turn off the burner. Even if you could turn off the burner, which can't be done, it will have to burn itself out.
Idiotic anthrocentric arrogance, thinking humans can control global changes!
Not sure I understand your point? Are you saying humans cannot effect climate so "climate change" is indeed a hoax or that we can't change the damage already done by our centuries of pouring hot house gasses into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels??
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
Climate changes. That's what it does.
Nobody can stop it. Griddle stays hot a long time after you turn off the burner. Even if you could turn off the burner, which can't be done, it will have to burn itself out.
Idiotic anthrocentric arrogance, thinking humans can control global changes!
Nobody said that humans can control climate. However, we can have an effect on it, both positive and negative. Right now, we are having a negative effect.
“In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.”
? Albert Einstein
I wonder why they don't run the opposite of this graphic whenever there's a heat wave?
Wasn't trying to be mysterious, seems pretty simple to me. I hate to be pessimistic, my point is that by the time you notice a change it is too late, even if you could somehow impact it. add to that all the newly developed nations that are hogwild for cars and all, add to that the fact that forest fires, methane release from the arctic, volcanoes dwarf any human emissions.... have you ever seen a big forest fire? Just one big one puts up as much smoke as a hundred cities in a hundred years! I
watch them every summer, this smoke is going to pour into the atmosphere whether we like it or not. blacken arctic ice, increase melting...
man, it is too late. good intent noted and appreciated. as far as it being a left-right political football, that is just dogs growling under the table for crumbs that neither is going to get.
Pontoon City, here we come!
Flash to bang time... Kind of like seeing the lightning and the thunder is still coming. We are talking about all the mass of the oceans and water, it doesn't just change on a dime. We are nothing in the face of change on this scale, whether or not we have contributed to it.
we could cease all human carbon emissions right this minute and the forests will keep burning, the arctic will keep melting and releasing methane. Moot since the world population is exploding and everyone is gearing up for their big carbon party.
Just one big one puts up as much smoke as a hundred cities in a hundred years! I
Ah, no. Not quite.
Her preliminary estimates indicate that the fires emitted 7.9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in just the one-week period of October 19-26--equivalent to 25 percent of the monthly emissions from all fossil fuel burning throughout California.
Overall, the study estimates that U.S. fires release about 290 million metric tons of carbon dioxide a year, the equivalent of 4 to 6 percent of the nation's carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel burning.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already have to know what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
As far as you know.
I guess it's better to believe that man has the ability to predict the future. A quick examination of past predictions made by climate alarmists proves they suck at it.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
As far as you know.
I guess it's better to believe that man has the ability to predict the future. A quick examination of past predictions made by climate alarmists proves they suck at it.
No, you used predicting weather as a means of saying climate can't be predicted. It is not the same.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
As far as you know.
I guess it's better to believe that man has the ability to predict the future. A quick examination of past predictions made by climate alarmists proves they suck at it.
No, you used predicting weather as a means of saying climate can't be predicted. It is not the same.
Try to follow the conversation. I was responding to Bill Graham, who had commented on temperature. My response had nothing to do with predicting "weather"
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
As far as you know.
I guess it's better to believe that man has the ability to predict the future. A quick examination of past predictions made by climate alarmists proves they suck at it.
No, you used predicting weather as a means of saying climate can't be predicted. It is not the same.
Try to follow the conversation. I was responding to Bill Graham, who had commented on temperature. My response had nothing to do with predicting "weather"
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Your words, genius.
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
As far as you know.
I guess it's better to believe that man has the ability to predict the future. A quick examination of past predictions made by climate alarmists proves they suck at it.
No, you used predicting weather as a means of saying climate can't be predicted. It is not the same.
Try to follow the conversation. I was responding to Bill Graham, who had commented on temperature. My response had nothing to do with predicting "weather"
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Your words, genius.
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Not one word about weather. Why don't you stop wasting time?
And don't send me any more stupid PM's advising me not to feed trolls. Talk about a waste of time.
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
As far as you know.
I guess it's better to believe that man has the ability to predict the future. A quick examination of past predictions made by climate alarmists proves they suck at it.
No, you used predicting weather as a means of saying climate can't be predicted. It is not the same.
Try to follow the conversation. I was responding to Bill Graham, who had commented on temperature. My response had nothing to do with predicting "weather"
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Your words, genius.
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Not one word about weather. Why don't you stop wasting time?
Meteorologist cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
That is weather, trollboy.
And don't send me any more stupid PM's advising me not to feed trolls. Talk about a waste of time.
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Yeah, I know. I have been feeding a troll this evening. Tell me, do you spend your entire day on here? Every time I come onto the site, you are logged in. You should consider getting a life.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
As far as you know.
I guess it's better to believe that man has the ability to predict the future. A quick examination of past predictions made by climate alarmists proves they suck at it.
No, you used predicting weather as a means of saying climate can't be predicted. It is not the same.
Try to follow the conversation. I was responding to Bill Graham, who had commented on temperature. My response had nothing to do with predicting "weather"
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Your words, genius.
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Not one word about weather. Why don't you stop wasting time?
Why don't you stop lying because "temperatures five or 10 days in advance" is weather. Or maybe he's right and you just really know the difference.
And don't send me any more stupid PM's advising me not to feed trolls. Talk about a waste of time.
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Yeah, I know. I have been feeding a troll this evening. Tell me, do you spend your entire day on here? Every time I come onto the site, you are logged in. You should consider getting a life.
and a JOB 😛
C'mon, fellas. We hang out in a sewer here, but there is a too far. Some stuff isn't necessary, IMO.
Good article bhawk, i read it and it actually supports my point, that we are past the failsafe on climate change. good shootin on my wildeyed estimate of forest fire smoke. that said, you cant imagine the sheer volume of smoke i see in my job. it is staggering.
And four to six percent is a good bit of output. Important to note that forest fire smoke does not get man off the hook, the dense forests are a direct result of human activity, logging off, dense regrowth, and total fire suppression. Here is another bit from your article
"Our attempts to control fire have had the unintended benefit of sequestering more carbon in our forests and reducing the impact of human combustion of fossil fuels. However, as these forests now begin to burn, that stored 20th century carbon is moving back into the atmosphere, where it may compound our current problems with CO2."
My sense is that folks can argue all they want, for whatever interests they have, but by now this thing is going through its effects based on a long buildup and we will have to ride it out asbestos we can, even tho we will never be fireproof. har har. So if it makes you feel better call it a hoax, or not, but the earth is warming, the icecaps are breaking up, it is happening, and it is going to be one intense shift.
it doesnt matter what we think, even if Europe and the US curb emissions, which they havent really done to the point needed, even if it could be achieved, we have China and India coming up and nobody can deny them their hundred year carbon orgy, the big hogwallow you get to have when you enter first world industrial power status.
The feedback loops already established are going to amplify and it is just the way it is, and it is a whole lot bigger than we will ever be. Man is part of it, why is it so allfired important to deny that? because potato chip price will go up at the dollar store? that will happen anyway! Try thinking outside the insignificant little consumer box for once folks! You might find that we live in dramatic, fascinating, and frightening times!
and start shopping for pontoons if you live in the low country
Good article bhawk, i read it and it actually supports my point, that we are past the failsafe on climate change. good shootin on my wildeyed estimate of forest fire smoke. that said, you cant imagine the sheer volume of smoke i see in my job. it is staggering.
And four to six percent is a good bit of output. Important to note that forest fire smoke does not get man off the hook, the dense forests are a direct result of human activity, logging off, dense regrowth, and total fire suppression. Here is another bit from your article
"Our attempts to control fire have had the unintended benefit of sequestering more carbon in our forests and reducing the impact of human combustion of fossil fuels. However, as these forests now begin to burn, that stored 20th century carbon is moving back into the atmosphere, where it may compound our current problems with CO2."
My sense is that folks can argue all they want, for whatever interests they have, but by now this thing is going through its effects based on a long buildup and we will have to ride it out asbestos we can, even tho we will never be fireproof. har har. So if it makes you feel better call it a hoax, or not, but the earth is warming, the icecaps are breaking up, it is happening, and it is going to be one intense shift.
it doesnt matter what we think, even if Europe and the US curb emissions, which they havent really done to the point needed, even if it could be achieved, we have China and India coming up and nobody can deny them their hundred year carbon orgy, the big hogwallow you get to have when you enter first world industrial power status.
The feedback loops already established are going to amplify and it is just the way it is, and it is a whole lot bigger than we will ever be. Man is part of it, why is it so allfired important to deny that? because potato chip price will go up at the dollar store? that will happen anyway! Try thinking outside the insignificant little consumer box for once folks! You might find that we live in dramatic, fascinating, and frightening times!
and start shopping for pontoons if you live in the low country
😛
This issue became dead in the water in America the moment that Al Gore became a political face of it. Once that happened, any hope for any discussion, worthwhile or not, permanently ended. It's just another football in the polarization game.
Wait. I thought weather was not climate. Perhaps we'll never get that straight.
Can't have weather without climate can you? The world is getting hotter do you deny that?
[Edited on 8/3/2015 by Bill_Graham]
To blame human activities for temperatures warmer than they should be means that we already knew what temperatures were supposed to be before the fact. How could we have possibly know that? The best meteorologists cannot even accurately predict temperatures five or 10 days in advance.
Your post proves that you do not know the difference between weather and climate.
As far as you know.
I guess it's better to believe that man has the ability to predict the future. A quick examination of past predictions made by climate alarmists proves they suck at it.
It's better to remain silent and thought a fool than to speak and erase all doubt.
You should strive to remember that.
And don't send me any more stupid PM's advising me not to feed trolls. Talk about a waste of time.
[Edited on 8/4/2015 by alloak41]
Yeah, I know. I have been feeding a troll this evening. Tell me, do you spend your entire day on here? Every time I come onto the site, you are logged in. You should consider getting a life.
and a JOB 😛
C'mon, fellas. We hang out in a sewer here, but there is a too far. Some stuff isn't necessary, IMO.
Most of internet forums are sewers. The ones that aren't are generally over moderated.
Not one word about weather. Why don't you stop wasting time?
Why don't you stop lying because "temperatures five or 10 days in advance" is weather. Or maybe he's right and you just really know the difference.
But you've said it yourself, weather is not climate. So why use a weather measurement (temperature) as a means of furthering a case for climate change? Whoops.....
Logic. The climate change proponents most commonly use TEMPERATURE as proof that climate change is viable. Just as Bill Graham did in this example, correct? So how can one use tmperature readings as proof of climate change while also claiming that climate is not weather? The logic doesn't hold up.
Climate is about trends .... trends of temperatures are climate............ 😛
