Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [Dirt fighter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dirt fighter wrote:
Nobel commitee lmfao! Apperently they can be sucked into anything. The gave obama one of those for doing absolutely nothing. I could be wrong but didnt al gore get one for that stupid movie he made? All bull shit but I give him some credit, he made a ton of money off the hoax believers.

News flash just for you, pal: there's a slight difference between the science prizes and the peace and lit prizes. And unfortunately for you they don't offer a Drama prize.

Still waiting for you to post up some of those "reputable scientists" ...
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [eb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eb wrote:
H- wrote:
CruseVegas wrote:
What should the temperature be?


You are putting the cart before the horse. First we must figure out how to measure the temperature -- that has not been settled yet.


You guys both know better. Stop being so disingenuous.

Are you new here?

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [FishyJoe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FishyJoe wrote:
Look, I'm all for wind and solar. But in the short run there is no way they are going to quickly reduce emissions or lower costs.

Nuclear is a reliable bridge technology we can use to quickly reduce carbon usage. But a lot of non-science is being used to oppose it. The same kind of non-science being used to deny climate change.

How long does it take for a nuclear plant to go from proposal to energy generation?

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [CaptainCanada] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CaptainCanada wrote:
https://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/12/07/weather-channel-meteorologist-calls-out-breitbart-please-stop-using-our-video-mislead-americans/214739


Damn libtards and their science!


And the rebuttal by Breitbart:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/07/weather-channel-attacks-breitbarts-climate-science-fake-news-climate-change/


Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [eb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eb wrote:
getcereal wrote:
I just bought a mandatory Ultra low VOX Water heater that cost $140.00 more than a simple low VOX water heater to save the planet. Our regulations have put hundreds of companies out of business.


It's NOx, not "VOX", and it has nothing to do with climate change. But don't let the facts stop your cute little rant!


P. S. Gotta list of those "hundreds of companies"? Or was that another thing you just made up?

"NOx" or "VOX" who gives a shit? All I know is I am a hero who is saving the planet because I bought a water heater that cost $140.00 more than normal. So YEAH!

You are right about "hundreds of companies" it is thousands not hundreds. Personally I know at least 4 companies that I have contracted with, that are now outsourcing manufacturing and research out of state because it is really tough to keep up with all the regulations and other expenses to make a profit here in San Diego. This companies would probably not make a list of "leaving" but a lot of the work did leave.

http://www.spectrumlocationsolutions.com/pdf/Businesses-Leave-California-.pdf

"In California, costs to run a business are higher than in other states and nations – largely due to the states tax and regulatory policies – and the business climate shows little chance of improving. It is understandable that from 2008 through 2015, at least 1,687 California disinvestment events occurred, a count that reflects only those that became public knowledge. Experts in site selection generally agree that at least five events fail to become public knowledge for every one that does. Thus it is reasonable to conclude that a minimum of 10,000 California disinvestment events have occurred during that period."
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [getcereal] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
getcereal wrote:
eb wrote:
getcereal wrote:
I just bought a mandatory Ultra low VOX Water heater that cost $140.00 more than a simple low VOX water heater to save the planet. Our regulations have put hundreds of companies out of business.


It's NOx, not "VOX", and it has nothing to do with climate change. But don't let the facts stop your cute little rant!


P. S. Gotta list of those "hundreds of companies"? Or was that another thing you just made up?


"NOx" or "VOX" who gives a shit? All I know is I am a hero who is saving the planet because I bought a water heater that cost $140.00 more than normal. So YEAH!

You are right about "hundreds of companies" it is thousands not hundreds. Personally I know at least 4 companies that I have contracted with, that are now outsourcing manufacturing and research out of state because it is really tough to keep up with all the regulations and other expenses to make a profit here in San Diego. This companies would probably not make a list of "leaving" but a lot of the work did leave.

http://www.spectrumlocationsolutions.com/pdf/Businesses-Leave-California-.pdf

"In California, costs to run a business are higher than in other states and nations – largely due to the states tax and regulatory policies – and the business climate shows little chance of improving. It is understandable that from 2008 through 2015, at least 1,687 California disinvestment events occurred, a count that reflects only those that became public knowledge. Experts in site selection generally agree that at least five events fail to become public knowledge for every one that does. Thus it is reasonable to conclude that a minimum of 10,000 California disinvestment events have occurred during that period."


Texas thanks you for the Toyota Facility. :)

Can someone point to me a paper where they have analysed the carbon output as it correlates the rise in temperature over the last 100 years? Is there a direct correlation where we can show a certain number of tons of CO2 has a certain effect on the temperature? Scientifically proven. Not just that Carbon causes the temperature to go up, ice to melt etc. Historical evidence that x carbon caused y warming.

How did the warming proponents choose 2 degrees as the magic tipping point and how do we know that if we limit carbon it won't still rise by those 2 degrees? How much can we still be allowed to emit in terms of tons of carbon globally and not go over that 2 degrees and how do we arrive at that number?
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [getcereal] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
getcereal wrote:
"NOx" or "VOX" who gives a shit? All I know is I am a hero who is saving the planet because I bought a water heater that cost $140.00 more than normal. So YEAH!

Very well, then - do carry on with your heroics.

getcereal wrote:
You are right about "hundreds of companies" it is thousands not hundreds. Personally I know at least 4 companies that I have contracted with, that are now outsourcing manufacturing and research out of state because it is really tough to keep up with all the regulations and other expenses to make a profit here in San Diego. This companies would probably not make a list of "leaving" but a lot of the work did leave.

http://www.spectrumlocationsolutions.com/pdf/Businesses-Leave-California-.pdf

"In California, costs to run a business are higher than in other states and nations – largely due to the states tax and regulatory policies – and the business climate shows little chance of improving. It is understandable that from 2008 through 2015, at least 1,687 California disinvestment events occurred, a count that reflects only those that became public knowledge. Experts in site selection generally agree that at least five events fail to become public knowledge for every one that does. Thus it is reasonable to conclude that a minimum of 10,000 California disinvestment events have occurred during that period."

So California has high taxes that cause "disinvestment events". Who gives a shit?
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [ACE] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ACE wrote:


Can someone point to me a paper where they have analysed the carbon output as it correlates the rise in temperature over the last 100 years? Is there a direct correlation where we can show a certain number of tons of CO2 has a certain effect on the temperature? Scientifically proven. Not just that Carbon causes the temperature to go up, ice to melt etc. Historical evidence that x carbon caused y warming.

How did the warming proponents choose 2 degrees as the magic tipping point and how do we know that if we limit carbon it won't still rise by those 2 degrees? How much can we still be allowed to emit in terms of tons of carbon globally and not go over that 2 degrees and how do we arrive at that number?

Do you think that scientists just made up these ideas?

You could go to the IPCC reports, or realclimate.org, or probably some NASA sites, and look things up. If you are looking for a formula increase_in_temperature = some_number * tons_of_carbon, it doesn't exist in any form that a layman would understand, because there are many other factors involved. All the research is out there, and has been reviewed and re-reviewed (by scientists of differing beliefs), and has stood up to scrutiny.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
ACE wrote:


Can someone point to me a paper where they have analysed the carbon output as it correlates the rise in temperature over the last 100 years? Is there a direct correlation where we can show a certain number of tons of CO2 has a certain effect on the temperature? Scientifically proven. Not just that Carbon causes the temperature to go up, ice to melt etc. Historical evidence that x carbon caused y warming.

How did the warming proponents choose 2 degrees as the magic tipping point and how do we know that if we limit carbon it won't still rise by those 2 degrees? How much can we still be allowed to emit in terms of tons of carbon globally and not go over that 2 degrees and how do we arrive at that number?


Do you think that scientists just made up these ideas?

You could go to the IPCC reports, or realclimate.org, or probably some NASA sites, and look things up. If you are looking for a formula increase_in_temperature = some_number * tons_of_carbon, it doesn't exist in any form that a layman would understand, because there are many other factors involved. All the research is out there, and has been reviewed and re-reviewed (by scientists of differing beliefs), and has stood up to scrutiny.


Didn't exactly point me to the direct paper. Just saying, its out there is not what I was looking for as I am lazy. I don't dispute or argue if someone wants to say MAN is the cause of temperature change, for the sake of argument. As I have said in the past, if that is what the big brains at Nasa say ( not trying to be condescending) then OK. I am more concerned about the US and international communities response to it. So far, I think our response should be (Great, that's nice).

We will look for ways to make the air cleaner, the planet better and get off fossil fuels, but we are not taking drastic steps unless you can show me what the drastic steps will get us.

Show me how much carbon we can emit and it won't cause the temperature to increase and why you know that. ( insert your article here).

Show me the historical correlation over the last 100 years of carbon output to temperature. ( insert article here).
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [eb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eb wrote:
getcereal wrote:

"NOx" or "VOX" who gives a shit? All I know is I am a hero who is saving the planet because I bought a water heater that cost $140.00 more than normal. So YEAH!


Very well, then - do carry on with your heroics.

getcereal wrote:
You are right about "hundreds of companies" it is thousands not hundreds. Personally I know at least 4 companies that I have contracted with, that are now outsourcing manufacturing and research out of state because it is really tough to keep up with all the regulations and other expenses to make a profit here in San Diego. This companies would probably not make a list of "leaving" but a lot of the work did leave.

http://www.spectrumlocationsolutions.com/pdf/Businesses-Leave-California-.pdf

"In California, costs to run a business are higher than in other states and nations – largely due to the states tax and regulatory policies – and the business climate shows little chance of improving. It is understandable that from 2008 through 2015, at least 1,687 California disinvestment events occurred, a count that reflects only those that became public knowledge. Experts in site selection generally agree that at least five events fail to become public knowledge for every one that does. Thus it is reasonable to conclude that a minimum of 10,000 California disinvestment events have occurred during that period."


So California has high taxes that cause "disinvestment events". Who gives a shit?
California business owners?
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
FishyJoe wrote:

Look, I'm all for wind and solar. But in the short run there is no way they are going to quickly reduce emissions or lower costs.

Nuclear is a reliable bridge technology we can use to quickly reduce carbon usage. But a lot of non-science is being used to oppose it. The same kind of non-science being used to deny climate change.


How long does it take for a nuclear plant to go from proposal to energy generation?

Not a new one, but an expansion of existing facility, Plant Vogtle in GA is getting 2 new units. It's approval started in 2009 and is "projected" to be done in 2020.
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [veganerd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pumped storage is another method

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity
Last edited by: schroeder: Dec 9, 16 13:37
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [eb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eb wrote:
Dirt fighter wrote:
Nobel commitee lmfao! Apperently they can be sucked into anything. The gave obama one of those for doing absolutely nothing. I could be wrong but didnt al gore get one for that stupid movie he made? All bull shit but I give him some credit, he made a ton of money off the hoax believers.

News flash just for you, pal: there's a slight difference between the science prizes and the peace and lit prizes. And unfortunately for you they don't offer a Drama prize.

Still waiting for you to post up some of those "reputable scientists" ...
Why do you libs always need others to do things for you. GOOGLE IT !
Here Ill make it east for you, try "real climate science"
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [Dirt fighter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dirt fighter wrote:
eb wrote:
Dirt fighter wrote:
Nobel commitee lmfao! Apperently they can be sucked into anything. The gave obama one of those for doing absolutely nothing. I could be wrong but didnt al gore get one for that stupid movie he made? All bull shit but I give him some credit, he made a ton of money off the hoax believers.

News flash just for you, pal: there's a slight difference between the science prizes and the peace and lit prizes. And unfortunately for you they don't offer a Drama prize.

Still waiting for you to post up some of those "reputable scientists" ...
Why do you libs always need others to do things for you. GOOGLE IT !
Here Ill make it east for you, try "real climate science"

He said reputable. Got any of those?

who's smarter than you're? i'm!
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [ACE] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Just saying, its out there is not what I was looking for as I am lazy........We will look for ways to make the air cleaner, the planet better and get off fossil fuels, but we are not taking drastic steps unless you can show me what the drastic steps will get us. "


You forgot to say, "I generally assume that scientists have no clue what they are talking about unless they can convince a bunch of triathletes in an off topic room to hold my hand and explain it to me in a way that I can....I mean in a way that I'm willing to understand."


God forbid you should ever get so sick that you need open heart surgery, but for the sake of your family, I hope you apply a little more due diligence than waiting for a bunch of random triathletes on the internet to convince you of the benefits of having someone cut your chest open. Do your own research, and with a few brain cells and an open mind, I'd expect you to draw the same conclusions as those who are the leading experts in the field.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [CaptainCanada] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What really blows my mind is the lack of shame that the anti science crowd has. I mean, they HAVE to know just how stupid they sound. I really don't know what they think they are accomplishing.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BarryP wrote:
What really blows my mind is the lack of shame that the anti science crowd has. I mean, they HAVE to know just how stupid they sound. I really don't know what they think they are accomplishing.

They know how stupid they sound, but facts don't matter. What matters us their own self interest. Facing human made climate change requires drastic changes. Those changes will cost, big time. So rather than even think about the changes, they deny the changes are needed. All those supposed "family values" conservatives don't give a shit about the world they are leaving to their grand children. It is hypocrisy of the highest order.

Fuck facts.

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [CaptainCanada] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"They know how stupid they sound, but facts don't matter. What matters us their own self interest. Facing human made climate change requires drastic changes. Those changes will cost, big time. So rather than even think about the changes, they deny the changes are needed. All those supposed "family values" conservatives don't give a shit about the world they are leaving to their grand children. It is hypocrisy of the highest order. "

But..but..but..climate change is just a Chinese plot to weaken America.
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [Dirt fighter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dirt fighter wrote:
eb wrote:

News flash just for you, pal: there's a slight difference between the science prizes and the peace and lit prizes. And unfortunately for you they don't offer a Drama prize.

Still waiting for you to post up some of those "reputable scientists" ...

Why do you libs always need others to do things for you. GOOGLE IT !
Here Ill make it east for you, try "real climate science"

I love the way you throw out a label when you don't know the first thing about my politics. But it's pretty typical of your reactionary approach.

But I do thank you for those search terms. "Real climate science". Such a keen insight! How easy it is for the media to manipulate you when your thinking is so simplistic.

Hint: about 1 in 10 of those search results has anything to do with real science, or reputable scientists.
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [ACE] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ACE wrote:
Show me how much carbon we can emit and it won't cause the temperature to increase and why you know that. ( insert your article here).

Show me the historical correlation over the last 100 years of carbon output to temperature. ( insert article here).

Your meaningful questions didn't get much of an answer. Pretty normal for the LR.

For the first question: basically any fossil carbon we burn will cause the temperature to increase when compared to the baseline of not burning fossil carbon. And the reason we know that is basic radiative transfer theory worked out in the 1800s. You can read up on radiative forcing here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcing.

The exact magnitude of the temperature increase for a given amount of CO2 emissions is not well known. This is because not all the CO2 ends up in the atmosphere - some ends up in the ocean, some in plants, some in soils, etc. This is all pretty complex and is not understood to any great accuracy. The term "climate sensitivity" is used to refer to the relationship between CO2 emissions and temperature increase. You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/.../Climate_sensitivity.

As far as the correlation between temperature and C02 over the last 100 years, here's a graph that shows it:

The graph shows atmospheric CO2 levels, not fossil fuel CO2 emissions, but we know (from isotope analyses) that pretty much the entire increase from ~285 ppm is due to fossil fuel burning.

Hope that helps and let me know if you have any more questions.
Quote Reply
Re: Breitbart gets schooled by the Weather Channel [CaptainCanada] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
They know how stupid they sound, but facts don't matter. What matters us their own self interest. Facing human made climate change requires drastic changes. Those changes will cost, big time. So rather than even think about the changes, they deny the changes are needed. All those supposed "family values" conservatives don't give a shit about the world they are leaving to their grand children. It is hypocrisy of the highest order.

Fuck facts.


I suppose that explains some. I've got a handful of relatives who are anti-climate change, but its only because they are anti-Democrat, and climate science is associated with Democrats. They then take some sort of pride out of being contrarian.....kind of like Duffy, but with less thinking and more ass-hole mixed in. Its like a Cowboys fan in Philadelphia. The same kind of thing that makes one want to root for the hometown rival is the same kind of thing that makes one want to post really stupid shit about climate change, or throw in support for Sarah Palin, or deliberately try to fuck up your high school teacher's lesson......hell, maybe they burned ants with a magnifying class when they were kids.......or maybe they still do it.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply

Prev Next