Moved from Portugal to Poland this year, and I love the winter here. It's snowing as crazy outside now. I like more this cold then those hell hot summer days you can't barely move.
Okt - I've heard of bottled water doing that but I've never witnessed it myself, would love to though.
Firecracker197 - I feel ya. Its -3 this morning where we live in OK.
Vitor - I dont mind snow, as long as the power stays on. Ya that's definitely cold.
TheWinterLord - That sounds like it must be pretty cold. Sorry to hear your under the weather.
When you dress like this and ride this guy to work or the grocery store.
Clearly someone who has lived in the midwest... When I lived in Minnesota my neighbor accidentally found a parked car while jumping snow drifts with his snowmobile. Ut oh... that was track on metal, someones going to be pissed.
meh, there are always going to be highs and lows until the day we die. Fretting over global warming is silly. Concern over smaugy dirty air...yes I can see that, but concern over CO2 in the air, a natural substance we exhale and plants need...meh.
People need to research carbon credits a bit more. Government will allow companies to continue to pollute that "dangerous" CO2 as much as they want as long as they pay for it. Sounds really scammy to me. Those costs will be filtered down to consumers...cap & trade they call it.
Ken Lay came up with the carbon credit scheme btw. People need to research more over the global warming hoax they keep embracing. Odds are people will just be pocketing the money instead of planting more trees.
I thought climategate exposed the nonsense. Hide the decline.
Maybe getting your news from oil barons isn't the best way to actually get fair and balanced news? Whats the old adage if someone says "trust me" they're probably lying?
http://video.pbs.org/video/1108763899/
I guess they're faking the satellite photos, time lapse and eye witness accounts of melt water lakes draining in 30-40 min? I guess glacial run off isn't a concern, who needs that pesky water? All just scare tactics and BS to go along with a global conspiracy?
Here's a question, what does it hurt if we do change our ways and ween ourselves off of oil?
What if we take the smart bet and play it safe instead of holding the gun up to our heads and pulling the trigger just to see if its loaded?
meh, there are always going to be highs and lows until the day we die. Fretting over global warming is silly. Concern over smaugy dirty air...yes I can see that, but concern over CO2 in the air, a natural substance we exhale and plants need...meh.
People need to research carbon credits a bit more. Government will allow companies to continue to pollute that "dangerous" CO2 as much as they want as long as they pay for it. Sounds really scammy to me. Those costs will be filtered down to consumers...cap & trade they call it.
Ken Lay came up with the carbon credit scheme btw. People need to research more over the global warming hoax they keep embracing. Odds are people will just be pocketing the money instead of planting more trees.
I thought climategate exposed the nonsense. Hide the decline.
Then need to make it just cap, no trade, and if companies can't cut their co2 they'd be shut down, no fines.
Maybe getting your news from oil barons isn't the best way to actually get fair and balanced news? Whats the old adage if someone says "trust me" they're probably lying?
http://video.pbs.org/video/1108763899/
I guess they're faking the satellite photos, time lapse and eye witness accounts of melt water lakes draining in 30-40 min? I guess glacial run off isn't a concern, who needs that pesky water? All just scare tactics and BS to go along with a global conspiracy?
Here's a question, what does it hurt if we do change our ways and ween ourselves off of oil?
What if we take the smart bet and play it safe instead of holding the gun up to our heads and pulling the trigger just to see if its loaded?
This is easy to flip.
Maybe getting your news from carbon trading barons isn't the best way to actually get fair and balanced news?
See what I did there? Really look into the carbon credit stuff and the details of the cap & trade bill. Climategate too has been quite an eye opener for those who don't just circle jerk each other in the comments section of Huffington Post.
No complaints from me to get away from oil. I just don't think you're going to get what you expect. Most seem to envision this world of everyone living off the grid with their own solar panels on their roofs. We'll always be paying to someone, whether it is for coal power or wind. Seems pointless to get excited over.
Energy industry lobbysts are in the pockets of the politicians and it doesn't really matter who you make your monthly bill out to. They'll guarantee you're still paying to someone...since they donate more to political campaigns than average folk do.
Individually people can do whatever they want. I just don't want to see energy costs go up on the average person because government is sticking the bill to consumers. You really don't have any idea what you're embracing. Price at the pump is going to go up.
Then need to make it just cap, no trade, and if companies can't cut their co2 they'd be shut down, no fines.
And cause more job loss for people in a tough economy...awesome. There is a ripple effect with just about anything. A lot of areas only get their source of power from a single place. So the lights should just go out for them?
Maybe getting your news from carbon trading barons isn't the best way to actually get fair and balanced news?
See what I did there? Really look into the carbon credit stuff and the details of the cap & trade bill.
It's an hour long special and you're already replying... looks like someone isn't interested in learning.
Ask yourself who has everything to lose and who has a "chance" to gain something. Also know that the "and trade" was put in there because certain powerful individuals with ties to certain industries wouldn't go along with just "cap" unless there was some way to make a quick buck. A lot of of the people for cap and trade would be happy with just cap.
And cause more job loss for people in a tough economy...awesome. There is a ripple effect with just about anything. A lot of areas only get their source of power from a single place. So the lights should just go out for them?
I'll use the timber industry here in the northwest as an example.
A long time ago the only kind of job you could get around here was hacking down trees. Everyone cried fowl when they started shutting mills down. Entire towns dried up a lot of jobs where lost. People found ways to move on, we're a resilient bunch of humans (speaking globally not just regionally). This same area is weather the recession pretty well with a semi diverse set of jobs. Should we have kept on logging until nothing was left?
It doesn't mean we can't log, it just means we can't rape the land for a quick buck.
We did it with farming, and the dust bowl happened, we learned and we adapted.
We did it with logging and mining, we ruined streams and drinking water we learned and are still adapting.
We're doing it with oil and our air and we need to adapt.
I can make a great living as a crack dealer, it doesn't give me the right to sell crack. Sometimes the excuse "because it makes money" isn't good enough, when you have to do whats right.
Actually still listening to the program Vig. I'll probably watch it instead of just listening a second time later. workin' on schtuff.
Your analogies can only be used if you think CO2 is bad. Like I said, I never supported smaugy air. The reality is you can't actually be green without CO2. And the science isn't settled on CO2 yet. The IPCC is dwindling in numbers. People are actually leaving the group and there are far more scientists who don't buy into the push anymore. Like 1500 to over 30K.
Not sure why PBS isn't reporting on that. Or anyone else for that matter. I noticed it took them forever to finally cover climategate when the net exposed it weeks prior.
Actually still listening to the program Vig. I'll probably watch it instead of just listening a second time later. workin' on schtuff.
Your analogies can only be used if you think CO2 is bad. Like I said, I never supported smaugy air. The reality is you can't actually be green without CO2. And the science isn't settled on CO2 yet.
I agree we can't stop emitting CO2 some is needed to make the world go round. But if we keep pumping more and more into the air and cutting down the things that use it to make the stuff we breath... At some point if we ever do start to turn the corner and temps decrease we probably won't have a problem boosting CO2 levels, we're pretty good at figuring out ways to pump it into the air, but not so good at getting it back out. It's probably a good idea to figure that out in case it is a bad thing.
China is developing now and putting coal fired power plants on line at the average of one a week. They stand to eclipse the US in pollution, so does India. We have a real chance to get these developing countries cleaner technology now that they can build a firm foundation on rather than having to retool later like the US is having to do now. If we put it off till later after they've developed like the US it will be much harder. There is a real chance the US could clean up its act and it won't make a bit of difference...
Oil will run out. Foreign oil production will hit a peak and prices at the pump will go up.
Would you rather see the prices set domestically for energy created locally, or by a cartel of people who hate the US?
We send money to the countries that want the US dead but they want our money first. What happens when they decide to stop giving us cheap oil, or can't because its all gone? They already ran tests and saw how it jacked up our economy. As soon as they have another source of income we'll see their true colors. Until then they'll let us stomp around and pretend like we run the show.
The IPCC is dwindling in numbers. People are actually leaving the group and there are far more scientists who don't buy into the push anymore. Like 1500 to over 30K.
Leaving because the science is wrong, or because they don't like the way they are politicking?
I'll get to reading the links in a bit thanks for the info.
wnd.com has a lot of fox news links on its main page, and the other links have a very distinctive slant. Quite a bit of "hard hitting info" but not a lot of facts. The scientists who signed a petition who do they work for? Oil and coal employ a bunch of scientists, I remember a group of 10k made news a few years back by signing up. I'll see if I can track down the name of the group and check it against the names that left, oh wait the article didn't give any facts just fair and balanced info for people who don't like to fact check.
Then get behind cap, drop the trade and stick it to Gore. Show your oil and coal buddies where the new money is going to be made and tell them to get in on it now. Tell them to buy and trade American, energy. Stop giving our money to the terrorist they like to remind us about every 3 seconds like with the "terrorist, Jihad has returned" ad they run every few inches on that page.
Obviously money to be made. Some in the media must be shareholders in these carbon traders. Just conjecture on my part.
The corporate media elite? Who said that Beck or Palin? Seriously fox new will rot your brain. Aren't you tired of their "buy gold" schemes, I mean commercials?
If I may add, the greenhouse effect/global warming is not about super hot summers and super cold winters. The hypothesis is that heat from the sun gets trapped inside the atmosphere instead of escaping out into space. That explanation does not cover colder winters no matter how its bent.
Under any circumstances, it would be nice to see both sides of the argument be more interested in empirical data rather than who is the most pious, or who makes more money. Because in the end of the day, there is money to be squeezed out of both beliefs. Luckily though, empirical evidence does not care about money or messiahanic complexes, it is just dead data, free from peemptive beliefs.
So what about if we, as the inhabitants of this damn rock, find out what is going on, instead of bickering about red herrings?
That explanation does not cover colder winters no matter how its bent.
The heat trapped by the atmosphere heats up the planet. This heat causes the polar ice caps, where most of the Earth's water is trapped, to melt. This melting ice water flows into the ocean which have warm and cold currents. These currents spread heat and moisture across the planet. England and much of Europe is much warmer and wetter than say Canada which is a similar latitude due to the warmth from the Gulf Stream that flows from the Carribean up the coast of the US and towards England. Pouring a bunch of ice water into the ocean will upset these warm/cold currents causing less warm air and water to be circulated around the globe. That's how global warming causes an ice age.
That still does not make for colder winters and warmer summers, at the same time. That is a year round, consistent, temperature phenomenon, that is not exclusive to global warming, as it has happened before. The planet has been way hotter than this as well. When the roman empire was at its peak, they had vineyards in northern England, successful ones at that. That is not possible today.
This is in no way saying that global warming, just a reminder of: correlation≠causation not correlation=causation.
Correlation is just what gives reason to formulate a hypothesis, not proof of a phenomena.
The global warming argument totally covers and allows for this winter.
This winter is also not whatsoever admissible evidence of global warming.
This is truly 100% completely irrelevant and immaterial and shows neither of you arent interested in making an effort to develop even a cursory, layman's understanding. So dont fight, it's silly.
Stephen; that's brilliant. I will be waving my dick around from now on, since I'm too poor to afford a thermometer. It's amazing how our bodily functions can help us save some cash.
Knew I shouldn't have posted anything. I was explaining one single thing: how a build up of green house gases can lead to a colder planet/ice age. That's it. I wasn't arguing anything. But go ahead and judge what I was doing or what I may or may not know about this subject.
And all I was doing was telling how those phenomenon is not exclusive to global warming, to get back to my first point about finding out what is going on without bickering about who gets more money, as if that had anything to do with the weather.
Properly reading the posts helps immensively in understanding what is being said. :P
Why is it cold in TX? Hmm maybe cause the jet stream is flowing over the Dakota's.
Yes global warming is real and if you don't believe that well you're wrong. I don't care much for politics but weather and science I love.
Within the environmental-science community there's definitely an agreement that there's an increase in temperatures, in some places, but there isn't consensus as to whether the climate changes are man-made or not. That's a fact. You can choose which scientists to believe, or you can make up your own opinion based on the manipulated empirical data released to the public so certain scientists can continue to receive funds.
In this day and age, the term empirical data's just a joke. There's so many ways to use empirical data, where to get them from, how to present them, what conclusions to draw from them, even outright manipulate them, the public can't trust anything anymore. Maybe we never could.
If anything the whole e-mail leak, the climagate-thing, proves there's just a handful of scientists in agreement out of thousands.
and some more empirical data:
basically, we're in a cool period, and earth is beginning to warm up again FINALLY.
excerpt:
During the Early Eocene alligators swam in swamps near the North Pole, and palm trees grew in southern Alaska.
nuff said.
but really, i don't mind, as long as we finally get electric cars, and other means of cleaner transportation.
Just back in the 11th century, crops turned out twice a year in northern europe, which was the main reason for the absolute explosion in populace, it was only after the 1200's that the dark bit of the middle ages, and the global cooling started. Greenland became unliveable, and wine production had to stop in Scotland and England. People back then thought that they were punished by God for something they did wrong, and then the black death came, which made the church sell VIP passes to heaven. Good business that.
Nowadays you can also buy repentance, though in the slightly different form of CO2 taxes.. yay!
Within the environmental-science community there's definitely an agreement that there's an increase in temperatures, in some places, but there isn't consensus as to whether the climate changes are man-made or not. That's a fact. You can choose which scientists to believe, or you can make up your own opinion based on the manipulated empirical data released to the public so certain scientists can continue to receive funds.
In this day and age, the term empirical data's just a joke. There's so many ways to use empirical data, where to get them from, how to present them, what conclusions to draw from them, even outright manipulate them, the public can't trust anything anymore. Maybe we never could.
If anything the whole e-mail leak, the climagate-thing, proves there's just a handful of scientists in agreement out of thousands.
wrong.
NOAA the EPA and NASA all say the same thing is going on. Seriously do you still believe the earth is flat and we didn't land on the moon? Oh I guess those were just facts right?
and Deja wtf is americanthinker? I could put together a better and more legit site then that.
Well on the plus side we know how to heat things up if we come up with a solution that sends us plummeting in the other direction. hahahahah bring the snow!
Replies
I moved to cold and wet Seattle from sunny bikini beached San Diego. I think i should have stayed unemployed.
That picture is fucking beautiful.
and spur, you know it's cold when the river gets frozen:
http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/1848/dsc02308f.jpg
Firecracker197 - I feel ya. Its -3 this morning where we live in OK.
Vitor - I dont mind snow, as long as the power stays on. Ya that's definitely cold.
TheWinterLord - That sounds like it must be pretty cold. Sorry to hear your under the weather.
meh, there are always going to be highs and lows until the day we die. Fretting over global warming is silly. Concern over smaugy dirty air...yes I can see that, but concern over CO2 in the air, a natural substance we exhale and plants need...meh.
People need to research carbon credits a bit more. Government will allow companies to continue to pollute that "dangerous" CO2 as much as they want as long as they pay for it. Sounds really scammy to me. Those costs will be filtered down to consumers...cap & trade they call it.
Ken Lay came up with the carbon credit scheme btw. People need to research more over the global warming hoax they keep embracing. Odds are people will just be pocketing the money instead of planting more trees.
I thought climategate exposed the nonsense. Hide the decline.
http://video.pbs.org/video/1108763899/
I guess they're faking the satellite photos, time lapse and eye witness accounts of melt water lakes draining in 30-40 min? I guess glacial run off isn't a concern, who needs that pesky water? All just scare tactics and BS to go along with a global conspiracy?
Here's a question, what does it hurt if we do change our ways and ween ourselves off of oil?
What if we take the smart bet and play it safe instead of holding the gun up to our heads and pulling the trigger just to see if its loaded?
Then need to make it just cap, no trade, and if companies can't cut their co2 they'd be shut down, no fines.
This is easy to flip.
Maybe getting your news from carbon trading barons isn't the best way to actually get fair and balanced news?
See what I did there? Really look into the carbon credit stuff and the details of the cap & trade bill. Climategate too has been quite an eye opener for those who don't just circle jerk each other in the comments section of Huffington Post.
Glaciers shrink and grow every year.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=glaciers+growing&aq=f&aqi=g5&oq=&fp=e8d6ef47431c6a4a
No complaints from me to get away from oil. I just don't think you're going to get what you expect. Most seem to envision this world of everyone living off the grid with their own solar panels on their roofs. We'll always be paying to someone, whether it is for coal power or wind. Seems pointless to get excited over.
Energy industry lobbysts are in the pockets of the politicians and it doesn't really matter who you make your monthly bill out to. They'll guarantee you're still paying to someone...since they donate more to political campaigns than average folk do.
Individually people can do whatever they want. I just don't want to see energy costs go up on the average person because government is sticking the bill to consumers. You really don't have any idea what you're embracing. Price at the pump is going to go up.
It is admitted that your bills will go up.
[ame]
And cause more job loss for people in a tough economy...awesome. There is a ripple effect with just about anything. A lot of areas only get their source of power from a single place. So the lights should just go out for them?
Ask yourself who has everything to lose and who has a "chance" to gain something. Also know that the "and trade" was put in there because certain powerful individuals with ties to certain industries wouldn't go along with just "cap" unless there was some way to make a quick buck. A lot of of the people for cap and trade would be happy with just cap.
A long time ago the only kind of job you could get around here was hacking down trees. Everyone cried fowl when they started shutting mills down. Entire towns dried up a lot of jobs where lost. People found ways to move on, we're a resilient bunch of humans (speaking globally not just regionally). This same area is weather the recession pretty well with a semi diverse set of jobs. Should we have kept on logging until nothing was left?
It doesn't mean we can't log, it just means we can't rape the land for a quick buck.
We did it with farming, and the dust bowl happened, we learned and we adapted.
We did it with logging and mining, we ruined streams and drinking water we learned and are still adapting.
We're doing it with oil and our air and we need to adapt.
I can make a great living as a crack dealer, it doesn't give me the right to sell crack. Sometimes the excuse "because it makes money" isn't good enough, when you have to do whats right.
http://cleantechnica.com/2008/07/30/largest-cleantech-industry-is%E2%80%A6carbon-credits-at-63-billion/
Actually still listening to the program Vig. I'll probably watch it instead of just listening a second time later. workin' on schtuff.
Your analogies can only be used if you think CO2 is bad. Like I said, I never supported smaugy air. The reality is you can't actually be green without CO2. And the science isn't settled on CO2 yet. The IPCC is dwindling in numbers. People are actually leaving the group and there are far more scientists who don't buy into the push anymore. Like 1500 to over 30K.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=64734
Not sure why PBS isn't reporting on that. Or anyone else for that matter. I noticed it took them forever to finally cover climategate when the net exposed it weeks prior.
Something else...
http://newsbusters.org/node/11149
Obviously money to be made. Some in the media must be shareholders in these carbon traders. Just conjecture on my part.
China is developing now and putting coal fired power plants on line at the average of one a week. They stand to eclipse the US in pollution, so does India. We have a real chance to get these developing countries cleaner technology now that they can build a firm foundation on rather than having to retool later like the US is having to do now. If we put it off till later after they've developed like the US it will be much harder. There is a real chance the US could clean up its act and it won't make a bit of difference...
Oil will run out. Foreign oil production will hit a peak and prices at the pump will go up.
Would you rather see the prices set domestically for energy created locally, or by a cartel of people who hate the US?
We send money to the countries that want the US dead but they want our money first. What happens when they decide to stop giving us cheap oil, or can't because its all gone? They already ran tests and saw how it jacked up our economy. As soon as they have another source of income we'll see their true colors. Until then they'll let us stomp around and pretend like we run the show.
[ Leaving because the science is wrong, or because they don't like the way they are politicking?
I'll get to reading the links in a bit thanks for the info.
Then get behind cap, drop the trade and stick it to Gore. Show your oil and coal buddies where the new money is going to be made and tell them to get in on it now. Tell them to buy and trade American, energy. Stop giving our money to the terrorist they like to remind us about every 3 seconds like with the "terrorist, Jihad has returned" ad they run every few inches on that page.
Sniff sniff... yep smells fair and balanced.
The corporate media elite? Who said that Beck or Palin? Seriously fox new will rot your brain. Aren't you tired of their "buy gold" schemes, I mean commercials?
Under any circumstances, it would be nice to see both sides of the argument be more interested in empirical data rather than who is the most pious, or who makes more money. Because in the end of the day, there is money to be squeezed out of both beliefs. Luckily though, empirical evidence does not care about money or messiahanic complexes, it is just dead data, free from peemptive beliefs.
So what about if we, as the inhabitants of this damn rock, find out what is going on, instead of bickering about red herrings?
Oh, and can we get back on the topic?
Is this one of those optical illusions? I cannot focus my eyes on the text, no matter how hard I try.
This is in no way saying that global warming, just a reminder of: correlation≠causation not correlation=causation.
Correlation is just what gives reason to formulate a hypothesis, not proof of a phenomena.
I lol'd hard at that. Good point. Even with it being -3 today, if I was stranded outside, I dont think I could do that lol.
Humans WILL carry on using oil, oil WILL run out, humans WILL be fucked, the world WILL be better off.
Problem solved
The global warming argument totally covers and allows for this winter.
This winter is also not whatsoever admissible evidence of global warming.
This is truly 100% completely irrelevant and immaterial and shows neither of you arent interested in making an effort to develop even a cursory, layman's understanding. So dont fight, it's silly.
its cold, i need to buy more socks.
Properly reading the posts helps immensively in understanding what is being said. :P
Why is it cold in TX? Hmm maybe cause the jet stream is flowing over the Dakota's.
Yes global warming is real and if you don't believe that well you're wrong. I don't care much for politics but weather and science I love.
Within the environmental-science community there's definitely an agreement that there's an increase in temperatures, in some places, but there isn't consensus as to whether the climate changes are man-made or not. That's a fact. You can choose which scientists to believe, or you can make up your own opinion based on the manipulated empirical data released to the public so certain scientists can continue to receive funds.
In this day and age, the term empirical data's just a joke. There's so many ways to use empirical data, where to get them from, how to present them, what conclusions to draw from them, even outright manipulate them, the public can't trust anything anymore. Maybe we never could.
If anything the whole e-mail leak, the climagate-thing, proves there's just a handful of scientists in agreement out of thousands.
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/01/co2_fairytales_in_global_warmi.html
and some more empirical data:
basically, we're in a cool period, and earth is beginning to warm up again FINALLY.
excerpt:
During the Early Eocene alligators swam in swamps near the North Pole, and palm trees grew in southern Alaska.
nuff said.
but really, i don't mind, as long as we finally get electric cars, and other means of cleaner transportation.
Nowadays you can also buy repentance, though in the slightly different form of CO2 taxes.. yay!
wrong.
NOAA the EPA and NASA all say the same thing is going on. Seriously do you still believe the earth is flat and we didn't land on the moon? Oh I guess those were just facts right?
and Deja wtf is americanthinker? I could put together a better and more legit site then that.
Well on the plus side we know how to heat things up if we come up with a solution that sends us plummeting in the other direction. hahahahah bring the snow!