patrick.net

curious2 says

Iosef V HydroCabron says

those who believe the Earth is not warming, and these solar-warming theorists? ... I sometimes see the same conservative pushing both theories.

Where?

Cabronsito not only is infatuated with sarcasm, he also loves building strawmen.

dodgerfanjohn says

Cabronsito not only is infatuated with sarcasm, he also loves building strawmen.

Hi Butthurt! (Is it all right if I call you "Butthurt"?)

How you doin' today?

curious2 says

thunderlips11 says

Not to mention the Corn Complex....

there will remain the serious problem of methane emissions. And, regarding methane, there is a huge amount of methane hyclate on or near seafloors. As oceans warm, that will bubble up if we don't find a way to harvest it.

Methane clathrates are one of the major longstanding concerns which add to the seriousness of the situation.

Also ocean acidification due to industrial sulfuric acid emissions seems a more serious threat of extinction events than CO2 does, but I digress.

No, you don't digress: ocean acidification results from absorption of CO2 by seawater.

I would cite references, but that would be "appeal to authority", which you hold a dim view of.

Iosef V HydroCabron says

Do you actually believe that you're not insulting people here?

For someone who steps in to tell both sides why they're fools and followers, you are awfully sensitive.

There is a difference in my comments and yours, sir. Yours attack the individual personally with name calling, ("gold bug whore", "Butthurt", "right wing asshole" ) my comments were geared towards a train of thought held by those that might be considered conservatives or liberals.

Iosef V HydroCabron says

ocean acidification results from absorption of CO2 by seawater.

And all the acid rain simply disappears? One area where the Obama administration has made real progress is in efforts to reduce midwestern sulfuric acid emissions that had been dumping sulfuric acid all over the northeast and into the north Atlantic. Polluters had shifted the problem by installing taller smokestacks to throw the emissions farther east, via atmospheric currents, so that their own states would not be affected. Now, if only we could encourage China to buy some better technology; Chinese soot travels across the pacific to Alaska (along with trace amounts of Fukushima radiation, but that's another topic; some CO2 fetishists want more nuclear power because in their minds CO2 is worse than nuclear radiation).

Iosef V HydroCabron says

I would cite references, but that would be "appeal to authority", which you hold a dim view of.

I don't like to call people liars, but surely you know the difference between "appeal to authority" (as in, 'Newt Gingrich said something so it must be right') and citing sources (as in, it isn't just an anonymous Internet commenter posting this under a fake name, there is actual evidence I can link to).

curious2 says

. Now, if only we could encourage China to buy some better technology;

why not built it in the USA free from Chinese Hackers/Spying and Chinese pollution?

why should we "encourage" them to make more jobs for Chinese workers while US workers go without a job and income ?

Iosef V HydroCabron says

Methane clathrates...

Thank you - I will correct that in my original comment, where I wrote hyclate by mistake. Typing quickly, I was probably confusing "hydrate" and "clathrate" and ended up with hyclate, a different word entirely.

smaulgld says

It's a political war on both sides, science be damned. The left wants global taxes and the bankers are drooling at the prospect of controlling a multi trillion dollar cap and trade credit market.

The right is denying anything needs to be done.

Both sides are driven by ideology not science.

You forgot about the third side, us. We want an end to the pollution driving climate change, disease, and ecological collapse. The third side is composed of some 200 million Americans and billions of other people.

thomaswong.1986 says

stop blaming the US for all the worlds problems.. which you constantly

Tommy-boy, you dumb ass. I've never said the problem was solely the U.S., but because Afghanistan, Sudan, and the United States were the only countries not to sign the Kyoto Agreement, and the U.S. is the only industrialized country that didn't sign, our predicament is largely due to the U.S. federal government.

And asswipe, insisting on policy change isn't a form of degrading one's country. It's a way of protecting one's country. America is already being hit hard by climate change in the form of droughts, flooding, severe winters, more frequent and powerful hurricanes, and agricultural problems. So, by denying climate change and action on it, you Tommy-boy, are assfucking America.

And the argument that because China has followed the precedent set by America, it's too late for us to do anything, is just fucking retarded like anyone who proposes it.

Dan8267 says

You forgot about the third side, us. We want an end to the pollution driving climate change, disease, and ecological collapse. The third side is composed of some 200 million Americans and billions of other people.

Confirmation bias. I believe most people to be far more concerned about what to eat, where to live, and how to survive than about ecological changes. Your third side claims to represent 200 million Americans and billions of other people.

Here in Silicon Valley, land of the Prius, Tesla, Nissan Leaf, and more hybrids than you can shake a stick at, we have the option of paying an extra $0.015/kWh for green power from Silicon Valley Green Power (http://siliconvalleypower.com/index.aspx?page=1950). Given our high electric rates, this is only a few percent extra. Participation rate is only 7%.

If you can only get 7% of people in a wealthy area to sign up, where the politicians tout the green mantra constantly, and many people are in-your-face about saving the Earth, you're pretty much doomed in this approach elsewhere.

Dan8267 says

Tommy-boy, you dumb ass. I've never said the problem was solely the U.S., but because Afghanistan, Sudan, and the United States were the only countries not to sign the Kyoto Agreement, and the U.S. is the only industrialized country that didn't sign, our predicament is largely due to the U.S. federal government.

Kyoto is meaningless. The signatories aren't conforming to it. Meanwhile, non-Kyoto US has reduced carbon emissions due to shifting electrical generation from coal to gas, thanks to fracking.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/10/technologies-opposed-by-environmentalists-fracking-and-genetic-modification-have-cut-co2-emissions-to-20-yr-low/co2-7/

Here's a chart. I googled it, it happens to be on some conservative blog, feel free to google "united states carbon dioxide emissions" yourself and find an ideologically correct source if this one doesn't work. The graph will be similar.

Dan8267 says

hrhjuliet says

Politics should play absolutely no part in this issue.

Exactly. It is a matter of science and engineering. The fact that conservatives have turned it into a political subject and a culture war of rednecks vs. hippies is precisely the reason why conservatives should have no voice in this subject or in the legislation to deal with climate change. Conservatives are the environmental equivalent of Holocaust deniers.

Sad, but true.

Dan8267 says

Tommy-boy, you dumb ass. I've never said the problem was solely the U.S., but because Afghanistan, Sudan, and the United States were the only countries not to sign the Kyoto Agreement, and the U.S. is the only industrialized country that didn't sign, our predicament is largely due to the U.S. federal government.

Laughable...

There you go again, as if the pollution in China is again OUR fault because WE didnt sign Kyoto... What an idiot you are... Why do they need USA signature ? If they have problems and let them solve it themself, they dont need us in the loop.

Dan8267 says

America is already being hit hard by climate change in the form of droughts, flooding, severe winters, more frequent and powerful hurricanes, and agricultural problems. So, by denying climate change and action on it, you Tommy-boy, are assfucking America.

we had these climates in North America in the past 500 years long long before any pollution. you can even find whale bones in the mountains.
guess we are to blame for killing the whales atop mountains.

thomaswong.1986 says

we had these climates in North America in the past 500 years long long before any pollution. you can even find whale bones in the mountains.

guess we are to blame for killing the whales atop mountains.

Red Herring Whale bones on mountains do not in any way discredit man-made climate change or the severity of the consequences.

The evidence of man-made climate change and its impact is utterly indisputable. See this post.

However, once again, you have demonstrated that conservatives don't care how much America is being harmed by reckless pollution. All you give a damn about is your own selfish interests, and you're too damn stupid to realize that even those selfish interests are compromised by climate change.

thomaswong.1986 says

curious2 says

Thanks - I did forget to mention them. Even if McDonald's raises wages to $15/hr for the workers who peddle the subsidized cornfed beef, there will remain the serious problem of methane emissions.

you guys are something else... now blame MCD for all the global warming and air pollution problems... such cowards.

Yes, it takes such bravery to lick the boots of the powerful.

CaptainShuddup says

Without an alternative endgame, I personally don't give a fuck what the Liberals or Scientists have to say. They just trying to cash in on some of that ole black magic.

We all know what happens when an asteroid hits the earth, we all know what will happen if the sea level rises and floods every coastal region, we all know what will happen when the temperature rises and changes.

What we don't know, or have any of the foggiest slightest idea, is what in the FUCK (is, can, would) anyone do about it, when that day comes.

This is nihilism.

Or maybe philosophy borne of spite.

(I'm splitting hairs here.)

No it's not.
The Liberals are being like that (X) guy, who hangs out in parking lots of depressed areas where someshit head built a trendy restaurant. Who assures you if you give him $20 your car will be safe. But no sooner you walk out of site, he'll be gone with your $20, leaving your car to take it's chances in over-town.

"If the whole glacier system melts, Joughin says, it would raise global sea levels about 24 inches (60 centimeters), he adds. The process will take a while, roughly 200 to 900 years,"

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/05/140512-thwaites-glacier-melting-collapse-west-antarctica-ice-warming/

Looks like we have several centuries to adapt or reverse course. Then again Dan's subject heading wouldn't be as bed-wetting if it said we had centuries before the oceans might rise. Why are alarmist liberals such luddites? I have faith that humanity will find a way to adapt or ameliorate the worst impacts of climate change given hundreds of years to prepare or find alternative fuels.

I think many liberals confuse conservative's skepticism of the various carbon reduction scheme's futility to that of being "anti-science" or denying climate change all together.

But go ahead and try to convince BILLIONS of 2nd and 3rd world Chinese and Indians from stopping their evolution and progress (burning carbon) and send them back to eating dirt and famine. I'm sure they will voluntarily stunt their development because they are more concerned that Amsterdam was built below sea level and rich 1st world liberals like living on the coasts.

socal2 says

I think many liberals confuse conservative's skepticism of the various carbon reduction scheme's futility to that of being "anti-science" or denying climate change all together.

I fail to see how the left wing "the sky is falling" crowd is any different from the religious nuts who are proclaiming that the signs laid forth in Revelations are comming to fruition and the rapture is comming in the next few days/weeks/months.

socal2 says

But go ahead and try to convince BILLIONS of 2nd and 3rd world Chinese and Indians from stopping their evolution and progress (burning carbon) and send them back to eating dirt and famine. I'm sure they will voluntarily stunt their development because they are more concerned that Amsterdam was built below sea level and rich 1st world liberals like living on the coasts.

This is very good: it mixes the non-argument "nothing we can do, so it isn't happening" with the sneer at "librul elites".

Neither has anything to do with the question of whether or not warming is anthropogenic, of course, but this doesn't mean you're anti-science.

dodgerfanjohn says

I fail to see how the left wing "the sky is falling" crowd is any different from the religious nuts who are proclaiming that the signs laid forth in Revelations are coming to fruition and the rapture is coming in the next few days/weeks/months.

Bingo!!!!

Then you got Neil deGrasse Tyson painting him self into a corner, while trying so hard to prove that God doesn't exist. Then how does he leave the last question?

"...and where does it all come from? ...Nobody knows."

Yeah right Einstein God made it.

I watched his whole series, a minister could have told his whole series in the context of creationism. And would have probably done a better job at it to. As they wouldn't have had to defer to childish cartoons about ancient Zealots and Heretic Radicals that got them selves in a pickle for speaking out against the establishment.
Which had more to do with World History, than a smug condescending mansplaination of the Cosmos.

CaptainShuddup says

Then you got Neil deGrasse Tyson painting him self into a corner, while trying so hard to prove that God doesn't exist. Then how does he leave the last question?

"...and where does it all come from? ...Nobody knows."

Yeah right Einstein God made it.

Uh-huh.

And where does God come from?

Eric Clapton's Guitar silly.

Iosef V HydroCabron says

This is very good: it mixes the non-argument "nothing we can do, so it isn't
happening" with the sneer at "librul elites".

Neither has anything to do with the question of whether or not warming is
anthropogenic, of course, but this doesn't mean you're anti-science.

What the bed-wetters fail to understand is that the cure they are proposing (massive carbon reduction) could very well be worse than the disease of climate change......particularly for billions of people scraping out an existence in the 3rd world.

We can call the global warming alarmists a bunch of "reality deniers" since they refuse to even understand the human impacts of the policies they proposed like Kyoto.

Don't humans come before "the environment"? Our policies should be all about sustainability for the greatest number of human beings IMO.

And since Al Gore and other politicians and celebrities destroyed the credibility of the movement with apocalyptic predictions - it should be no surprise that the majority of the public has tuned out and rates climate change at the bottom of our concerns.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx

socal2 says

Don't humans come before "the environment"?

Nature bats last.

No environment means no humans.

Glad to see you finally view assfucking as something detrimental.
Welcome to the Right side son! Welcome to the Right!

Dan8267 says

So, by denying climate change and action on it, you Tommy-boy, are assfucking America.

Do any of you know why YAD06 is called "the most influential tree in history"?

In the meantime, by all means clean up the air, reduce dependence on oil and develop new sources of energy, but do NOT shovel this carbon credit crap on me. That is a gargantuan tax on America and the scam of the millennium. If you truly believe the "scientists" have proven their point, then it's time to move on to the civil engineers and city planners. It would also be time to stop being disingenuous and start admitting that many feel good policies are actually no more helpful than traditional ones.

We feel better about driving a Prius even though we know the production process generates vastly more CO2 that normal internal combustion engines. But then that's not the real reason those are considered "green" is it?

We also know that new fertilizers that are rich in nitrogen (which is 200 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2) although a potential modern miracle for famine ridden countries, is being quietly lobbied against for the good of humanity. How ironic.

And as has been suggested...by all means, sell your Cali beach front properties cheap. My great, great, great grand children will appreciate it. I guarantee you!

deepcgi says

driving a Prius even though we know the production process generates vastly more CO2 that normal internal combustion engines

But do the environmental impacts of hybrid vehicle production outweigh the long-term benefits of driving a cleaner running automobile? That answer is a resounding "no." If you drive both a conventional and hybrid car for 160,000 miles (257,495 kilometers), the conventional vehicle requires far more energy to operate and emits far more greenhouse gases over its lifetime, significantly canceling out any imbalance during the production stage

http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/does-hybrid-car-production-waste-offset-hybrid-benefits.htm

thomaswong.1986 says

you can even find whale bones in the mountains

this is one of the more profoundly stupid things I've had to read on the internet from a conservative and that's saying a lot

SoftShell says

Glad to see you finally view assfucking as something detrimental.

Welcome to the Right side son! Welcome to the Right!

Dan8267 says

So, by denying climate change and action on it, you Tommy-boy, are assfucking America.

Unlike you, I differentiate between consensual assfucking and forced assfucking.

The problem with this issue is that both sides have invested so much ego and tribalism into their opinions that neither can be right.

(Except for my side, which is the conservative side, but I won't tell you that because I'm pretending to be above the fray.)

If the sea level is rising, then why are sinkholes empty?

Sinkhole dug out at APSU's Governors Stadium

John Bailo says

If the sea level is rising, then why are sinkholes empty?

Clarksville TN elevation 382 feet above sea level. Is this post sarcastic or profoundly ignorant?

Automan Empire says

Clarksville TN elevation 382 feet above sea level. Is this post sarcastic or profoundly ignorant?

Well, it's cold somewhere today, so nyah nyah nyah Al Gore is fat!

(But it's warming on Mars, too, so that proves it's not human caused, or something, even though it's not really warming anyway because fat Al Gore or something fuck it I have no idea how these people think)

Ahhh. another liberal high altitude lake denier...

Automan Empire says

John Bailo says

If the sea level is rising, then why are sinkholes empty?

Clarksville TN elevation 382 feet above sea level. Is this post sarcastic or profoundly ignorant?

John Bailo says

If the sea level is rising, then why are sinkholes empty?

There is absolutely no doubt this side of a Flat Earth Society meeting that sea levels are rising. It has been measured everywhere, and can't be explained away by a conspiracy theory.

Have you been huffing hydrogen out behind the H2 station again?

Well, the level of panic was sufficiently high on this issue as to force me to do an hour's worth of homework on the story. AS USUAL I was able to find astoundingly bad reporting going on in the name of climate science. It struck me as odd that the "inevitable collapse" stories hit with such force in the past month when I recalled the bigger news in the scientific journals on this issue happening in the mid 2000's at the latest.

When I ran across the name of the Antarctic Thwaites Glacier in the LA Times, New York Times, AP, UK Guardian, and Huffington Post articles something about that name rang a bell (other than Thwaites being the largest of the studied glaciers in question). With a few more minutes of searching I found what I'd remembered reading five or so years ago.

Active volcanos had been discovered directly under the region of that glacial system and a number of UN IPCC SCIENTISTS NO LESS had published statements that the discovered volcanic activity could well be accelerating the collapse of the Thwaites System in particular.

Funny that these tiny little amateur media outlets like the LA Times failed to mention the volcanic acceleration!

http://www.qando.net/?p=1946

Here's a 2009 link illustrating the issue back then (let alone today).

There are a lot better things to be alarmed about. I'll just pick one that doesn't get enough air time right now to start us all off, shall I? How about increasing incidents of EDR Tuberculosis 3 across Central Europe? That's a nasty one! Not just incurable, but UNTREATABLE and SPREADS LIKE THE FLU from contact as simple as shaking hands or turning a doorknob after an infected person has just done the same!

Thats a better one to be alarmed about trust me this once (what with boils, choking, and coughing up blood AFTER periods of feeling like you've finally gotten over it).

Let's worry about that one now, instead.

There are a lot more that could have a serious impact on you within a year or so (rather than hundreds of years like this sea level issue). I'd be happy to freak you out over them if you'd prefer a different branch of science, economics or sociology. Just let me know. I'm here to help. :-)

deepcgi says

AS USUAL I was able to find astoundingly bad reporting going on in the name of climate science.

It does not matter how bad the press is at reporting climate change. What matters is that scientists have now established that a sea-level rise of 5 to 15 ft. is inevitable in the near term. That is all that counts.

Now we have to adjust our behavior accordingly. I'm not going to buy that house near the beach. That's a practical financial decision based on this new knowledge.

deepcgi says

There are a lot more that could have a serious impact on you within a year or so

The sea-level rise will not all occur at the end of the century. It is already affecting people. Islands that have been inhabited for hundreds of years are being evacuated because they are underwater.

As in the case of buying a house, this subject matter is extremely important. When sea-level rises, your insurance will not compensate you for the lost of your house or the land under it. Neither will government. Since this is the biggest financial decision you will make in your life, it's worth getting right.

Climate change isn't about "the sky is falling" panic. It's about answers to practical questions that will very materially affect you. Ignore it at your own peril.

C'mon, pleeeese! Let's worry about untreatable disease instead. It makes a better movie, for one thing!

OK. lemme see then...how about something simpler? The fact that AGRICULTURE is the leading cause of global deforestation rather than road building or urban sprawl. I like that one too! Apparently, farmers like to put their crops right in the path of naturally flowing water, and in areas where lots of tree chopping isn't necessary. While this sounds quite "green" of them on the surface, the truth is that the sparse patches of trees between larger forest sections are critical to maintain fringes of dense forest land. Once the farms fence off and irrigate an area along a stream, the two parts of the larger forest become divided and begin to dwindle like a receding hairline. I would have thought farming was a more GREEN use of land than say a highway system, but scientists say that highways usually make overpasses and bridges over critical waterways where large farms do not. Hm. Who'd a thunk?