The ten-year trend, even with 1998 as the hottest year (or possibly 2005), shows that we are still warming.
Trends? What’s a trend?
I PR’d in a half marathon last November. I have been getting steadily faster over the last 7 years. However, I am slower in the months since my race…probably by 15-20 minutes. Is this a new trend? Can I expect to continue to slow at this rate, even if my training picks up as it always had in the past? At this rate, will I be dead soon? Help me out?
I don’t do pink font, but I love the way people chop off data to whatever point it is most convenient for them. I personally don’t get it. I thought data was supposed to lead to knowledge rather than letting a belief lead you to data.
OK, OK OK, already, we got global warming. Hell, it is probably man made as well - I’ll agree with you. So considering at current trends we’ll have over 10 billion people on this planet all emmiting carbon and other nasty shit into the environment. SO smart guys, why don’t you all head out to Beijing and tell the 2 billion Chinese that will be on this planet in 50 years to stop procreating and building coal plants and while you are at it tell them that based off of their natural resource base there should only be about 500 million of them and to selectively start thinning the herd. Swing by INdia next with a similar message. When they tell you the equivalent to fuck off you can come back state side, ride your faggy Prius and read Al Gore’s book and actually believe for a minute you can make a difference.
you’re absolutely right. up to a point and, with the chinese, i think AIDS is a good example. with certain african countries, india, china, it’s as it was in this country as regards AIDS: deny, deny, deny, then, uh oh. and then the about face, double time.
when the aha moment hits, and i think it is hitting in china notwithstanding coal fired power plants coming on line one after the other, it’s still a big ship to turn. but i think they do get it in china.
while we’re bagging on china, tho, and hey it’s fun for me too, reflect on this: if america’s fleet got the same mileage as china’s, we’d be importing no oil from russia, the middle east or venezuela.
Dan, the chinese fleet? are those bicycles? Also you are aware that when a coal plant is built it is designed and intended for a useful life of 50-60+ years. They are not building them now to turn them off in a decade. Their energy needs are to large, coal resources too vast and in China, economic development always trumps environmental concerns.
We can whine about China. Or, we can get our own house in order before telling others what to do.
As Dan mentioned, China has higher fuel economy standards than we do. Also, in about 18 months, they will leap ahead of us in wind energy capacity too.
I didn’t know that George Costanza was a scientist!!
“….triggering self-reinforcing feedback mechanisms in global ecosystems,….”
**(“Jerry, just remember: It’s not a lie if you believe it.”) **
It was “Global Warming” then it became “Climate Change.”
Now it has become “**triggering self-reinforcing feedback mechanisms in global ecosystems,” **
I have always been fascinated by people who toy with words and embellish simple concepts/ideas with fancy language designed to impress, intimidate, confuse, sucker or scare the common man. Never-mind that what they’re talking about could be expressed with more prosaic language:
Example:
“During my life, I have seen Frenchmen, Italians, Russians…and so thanks to Montesquieu I even know that one can be a Persian. But I must say that as for man, I have not come across him anywhere”
Fancy words, but all he really needed to say was: “people suck.”
“But there is no doubt, in my mind, we (humans) are turning earth into a giant trash and destroying it @ multiple levels.”
We are polluting and trashing our environment, the Earth will be fine. Nature is way tougher then we give it credit for. We need to talk about our survival not the Earth’s. It confuses the subject. Global Warming is the wrong track to be on because it is so speculative. Air and water pollution affecting humans is much easier to prove. If we focus on pollution and stop talking climate we will make the same changes and change more peoples minds.
right. did we not establish that this is an immutable belief to which you intend to cling, come-what-may, irrespective of any evidence that might be presented to you, regardless how compelling?
Let’s duke it out, your truth vs. my truth. A Global Warming Smackdown, where your Messiah, Al Gore and his homies agree to take the questions (heat) from skeptics and the skeptics agree to take the questions from the charlatans.
or did Al not already pronounce: “the debate is over” = That’s hardly democratic…don’t you think?
Man, if in a 100 years, we had data showing that the north and south poles are gone, that many countries are under water, and that the average temperature in Vladivostok over the past 25 years was 125F, with a variance of 5F, you’d still say there is no global warming, it’s bullshit.
That Big Kahuna says 98% of scientists agreeing on GW is nothing is funny too.
We’re discussing about Islam fundamentalists in other threads, but you two are GW denier fundamentalist. If it weren’t such a serious matter, I would laugh…
Real question. If I take a glass of ice water and let the ice melt the water never over flows. If ice melting is causing the sea levels to rise (which I don’t doubt) Then what is the difference?
I forced the change in terms from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” by virtue of my ruthless assault on Global Warming bullshit. Someone else can take the credit for the actual “invention” of the term.
Because the ice that we’re worried about is currently located on land masses. Melting of the polar ice cap doesn’t result in sea level rise, but melting of glaciers on Greenland does.
i just want to know if my prior recollection is true: that you’ve made a decision to believe as you do, irrespective of evidence. i seem to recall that’s what you said. if so, i’ll pay close attention to everything you say… on other topics. i just wanted to make sure it was still safe to ignore you on this topic.
**Real question. If I take a glass of ice water and let the ice melt the water never over flows. If ice melting is causing the sea levels to rise (which I don’t doubt) Then what is the difference? **
The ice is on the land and flowing into the ocean. The opposite happened during the last ice age and the coast of new york was 100 miles out to sea from where it is now.
