Is global warming

Is global warming

  • man-made and real?

  • Discussion
  • You're on quite the roll, Pole.

  • poleman said... (original post)

    man-made and real?

    It is absolutely man-made...scientific evidence has been appropriately corrected to verify it.

    We needs lots and lots of money to fix it...please send cash...

  • tag3 said... (original post)

    You're on quite the roll, Pole.

    So be it!

  • bhayesii said... (original post)

    It is absolutely man-made...scientific evidence has been appropriately corrected to verify it.

    We needs lots and lots of money to fix it...please send cash...

    So we need to stop airplane flights. Destroy existing building and replace them. Pay people unwilling to work and build high speed rail ways to cirmumvent air traffic? Really!

    This post was edited by poleman 11 months ago

  • bhayesii said... (original post)

    It is absolutely man-made...scientific evidence has been appropriately corrected to verify it.

    We needs lots and lots of money to fix it...please send cash...

    Lol! Aint happening!

  • bhayesii said... (original post)

    It is absolutely man-made...scientific evidence has been appropriately corrected to verify it.

    We needs lots and lots of money to fix it...please send cash...

    No, you need to get the 2 biggest polluters on the planet to cut their rate of admissions. China and India create more pollution than everyone else on the planet. Get them to reduce their pollution and the planet will be a better place to live.

  • poleman said... (original post)

    No, you need to get the 2 biggest polluters on the planet to cut their rate of admissions. China and India create more pollution than everyone else on the planet. Get them to reduce their pollution and the planet will be a better place to live.

    Actually it is the corporations that own the factories, and produce more inefficient equipment and not the country's. They run the country's, not the other way around. Hopefully the tariffs will force them back into the US to do business, and under US Constitutional Law, where they can be the one's brought to heel, to borrow a phrase from some crazy b^*#!

  • They’ve shown in some places seas are rising an inch a year, that’s a bunch, of course, Beach front used to be Macon to Columbus and Antarctica wasn’t ice but one huge forrest full of dinosaurs.

  • Hoopergdawg said... (original post)

    They’ve shown in some places seas are rising an inch a year, that’s a bunch, of course, Beach front used to be Macon to Columbus and Antarctica wasn’t ice but one huge forrest full of dinosaurs.

    It's actually more like 0.8" in almost 100 years. Once you consider all of the bridge pilings, dock pilings, all of the much larger ships, all of the new mega/super yachts that didn't exist then, and subtract their displacement, there isn't any sea level increase at all. Possibly a slight decrease. That's not counting the artificial islands, and real new volcanic islands that are also displacing water. This theory is easily verified by putting ice in a glass of water. I'm only 57 years old splitting my lifetime on the water on the Ga coast, the Caribbean, and the Gulf of Mexico among other places, and I haven't noticed any sea level increases in those areas myself. I know that may be too logical of an approach but rarely a day in my life has gone by without me not looking at water, wherever I am. I won't bother how many days of my life I spent studying weather charts, for the very reason that I have spent that much time on the water, but weather fronts do Not travel in circular motions, historically, so ya know! With the rare historic hurricane as the exception, of course. Lot of scientists on both sides of this argument, and I'm pretty sure the highest paid "believe" what they are told to "believe"!

    This post was edited by ChancedIt 6 months ago

  • ChancedIt said... (original post)

    It's actually more like 0.8" in almost 100 years. Once you consider all of the bridge pilings, dock pilings, all of the much larger ships, all of the new mega/super yachts that didn't exist then, and subtract their displacement, there isn't any sea level increase at all. Possibly a slight decrease. That's not counting the artificial islands, and real new volcanic islands that are also displacing water. This theory is easily verified by putting ice in a glass of water. I'm only 57 years old splitting my lifetime on the water on the Ga coast, the Caribbean, and the Gulf of Mexico among other places, and I haven't noticed any sea level increases in those areas myself. I know that may be too logical of an approach but rarely a day in my life has gone by without me not looking at water, wherever I am. I won't bother how many days of my life I spent studying weather charts, for the very reason that I have spent that much time on the water, but weather fronts do Not travel in circular motions, historically, so ya know! With the rare historic hurricane as the exception, of course. Lot of scientists on both sides of this argument, and I'm pretty sure the highest paid "believe" what they are told to "believe"!

    Interesting, weather guy myself. Except my thing was I chased for a few years until I got married, been a couple times since, but it’s rare. Ironically, biggest one ever encountered actually hit my hometown of Ringgold in 2011. 196 mph winds at peak, 4mph from being F5.

    Mentioned hurricanes, weird how they can change topography. We always eat at Inlet Harbor in Daytona and it changed it dramatically.

  • Hoopergdawg said... (original post)

    Interesting, weather guy myself. Except my thing was I chased for a few years until I got married, been a couple times since, but it’s rare. Ironically, biggest one ever encountered actually hit my hometown of Ringgold in 2011. 196 mph winds at peak, 4mph from being F5.

    Mentioned hurricanes, weird how they can change topography. We always eat at Inlet Harbor in Daytona and it changed it dramatically.

    Direct hit can change it in a hurry. Definitely moves some water and some sand around, and trees and buildings, lol. Never chased tornados, but I've run from some. Been in around 30 hurricanes or so. I've counted as many as 12 waterspout/tornadoes at once out my window before.

    This post was edited by ChancedIt 6 months ago

  • ChancedIt said... (original post)

    Direct hit can change it in a hurry. Definitely moves some water and some sand around, and trees and buildings, lol. Never chased tornados, but I've run from some. Been in around 30 hurricanes or so. I've counted as many as 12 waterspout/tornadoes at once out my window before.

    That’s insane. Hurricane Matthew hit Inlet Harbor hard, destroyed the restaurants and changed the water flow. It now flows on the other side of the island.

  • Hoopergdawg said... (original post)

    That’s insane. Hurricane Matthew hit Inlet Harbor hard, destroyed the restaurants and changed the water flow. It now flows on the other side of the island.

    Great episode on Tucker Carlson tonight about the article that came from AOC's office where her guy that authored the new green fairytale admitted that they were full of crap, and that it was all for a new economic model, and not because they have any evidence of the world ending. Of course, I saw Batman, James Bond, and Austin Powers where hollyweird showed everybody what they were planning to do. Not as if our military wasn't already creating monsoons as a weapon way back in Vietnam. Technology has assisted in tremendous progressions in "climate control." Maybe they will get creative and start doing positive things with it, instead of that BS evil routine that we have had to endure. Tucker had some moron professor come on from Cornell who also admitted to the economic hoax, yet was trying to defend it, by using China as a model. The worst offender of harmful emissions on the planet.

  • For those interested in how we come to believe in this theory, this fine lady will educate you like you've never dreamed.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5iYJqxRJPY

  • ChancedIt said... (original post)

    It's actually more like 0.8" in almost 100 years. Once you consider all of the bridge pilings, dock pilings, all of the much larger ships, all of the new mega/super yachts that didn't exist then, and subtract their displacement, there isn't any sea level increase at all. Possibly a slight decrease. That's not counting the artificial islands, and real new volcanic islands that are also displacing water. This theory is easily verified by putting ice in a glass of water. I'm only 57 years old splitting my lifetime on the water on the Ga coast, the Caribbean, and the Gulf of Mexico among other places, and I haven't noticed any sea level increases in those areas myself. I know that may be too logical of an approach but rarely a day in my life has gone by without me not looking at water, wherever I am. I won't bother how many days of my life I spent studying weather charts, for the very reason that I have spent that much time on the water, but weather fronts do Not travel in circular motions, historically, so ya know! With the rare historic hurricane as the exception, of course. Lot of scientists on both sides of this argument, and I'm pretty sure the highest paid "believe" what they are told to "believe"!

    You are capable at staring at a beach and telling if it has risen an inch since last year or 1918 or whatever time frame you prefer?

    That’s the logic?

  • WSGD said... (original post)

    You are capable at staring at a beach and telling if it has risen an inch since last year or 1918 or whatever time frame you prefer?

    That’s the logic?

    Or river, a bridge piling. Just not that complicated when you've done it for 50 years. In the science world they would call that research. Probably why the Director of Information from NOAA consulted with me. I've also had scientists/professors from fisheries and ocean research consult with me. By boat I have traveled over approximately 10,000 miles of coastline, which is a little bit more than most researchers. Owners of mega yachts have hired me to show their captains around the Caribbean to different anchorages where they could take their vessels depending on the draft/depth of their vessels. I apparently am some kind of expert on weather, and depth of water, so my opinion is probably just as/ if not more valuable than any you will ever read on the subject, as it turns out. I am probably the only person in history to fish both the Atlantic and Caribbean sides of every island from the Turks and Caicos to the DR, all the way down to Grenada, and the under water mountain range from St Barts to Venezuela and I haven't noticed the 1 inch of sea rise really. But it can be done just as well from any 1 single location like staring at a beach, as well. So.... You don't have to take my word for it, or theirs. You can actually do your own research, and think logically, for yourself!

    BTW, Record freezing temperatures in Queensland Aust. today. Below 0

    This post was edited by ChancedIt 6 months ago

  • ChancedIt said... (original post)

    Or river, a bridge piling. Just not that complicated when you've done it for 50 years. In the science world they would call that research. Probably why the Director of Information from NOAA consulted with me. I've also had scientists/professors from fisheries and ocean research consult with me. By boat I have traveled over approximately 10,000 miles of coastline, which is a little bit more than most researchers. Owners of mega yachts have hired me to show their captains around the Caribbean to different anchorages where they could take their vessels depending on the draft/depth of their vessels. I apparently am some kind of expert on weather, and depth of water, so my opinion is probably just as/ if not more valuable than any you will ever read on the subject, as it turns out. I am probably the only person in history to fish both the Atlantic and Caribbean sides of every island from the Turks and Caicos to the DR, all the way down to Grenada, and the under water mountain range from St Barts to Venezuela and I haven't noticed the 1 inch of sea rise really. But it can be done just as well from any 1 single location like staring at a beach, as well. So.... You don't have to take my word for it, or theirs. You can actually do your own research, and think logically, for yourself!

    BTW, Record freezing temperatures in Queensland Aust. today. Below 0

    You need an assistant? I’m your guy

  • _DC said... (original post)

    You need an assistant? I’m your guy

    Sure. Bring Rum. We gonna have to hydrate!

  • ChancedIt said... (original post)

    Or river, a bridge piling. Just not that complicated when you've done it for 50 years. In the science world they would call that research. Probably why the Director of Information from NOAA consulted with me. I've also had scientists/professors from fisheries and ocean research consult with me. By boat I have traveled over approximately 10,000 miles of coastline, which is a little bit more than most researchers. Owners of mega yachts have hired me to show their captains around the Caribbean to different anchorages where they could take their vessels depending on the draft/depth of their vessels. I apparently am some kind of expert on weather, and depth of water, so my opinion is probably just as/ if not more valuable than any you will ever read on the subject, as it turns out. I am probably the only person in history to fish both the Atlantic and Caribbean sides of every island from the Turks and Caicos to the DR, all the way down to Grenada, and the under water mountain range from St Barts to Venezuela and I haven't noticed the 1 inch of sea rise really. But it can be done just as well from any 1 single location like staring at a beach, as well. So.... You don't have to take my word for it, or theirs. You can actually do your own research, and think logically, for yourself!

    BTW, Record freezing temperatures in Queensland Aust. today. Below 0

    Lol at the guy saying he can eyeball an inch from a boat at distance asking people to think logically.

    Impressive credentials though. I’ll def say that. Seems like a great life. Good on you for it. Seems you’ve figured out something the rest of the world mostly couldn’t. Cap tip to it.

  • Of course it's not real! All this ice just went on vacation for a few years....

  • NateDawg241 said... (original post)

    Of course it's not real! All this ice just went on vacation for a few years....

    2012 was 7 years ago. You can't find a more recent picture to prove your point. I'd be much more inclined to agree with you if the photo was from 2018/2017. Since it not I think it BS! The Artic Ice Cap grew in 2019. The Antartic Ice Cap grew as well in 2019. What do you have to say about that? If you doubt me, then Google it and prove me wrong!

    This post was edited by poleman 5 months ago

  • does it not seem odd that most data you find is 1979 or later to compare with today? Why is that one might wonder? Why not look back just a few more decades? Because it will show that 1930 thru 1950 the arctic temps were the similat to today...

    And the comparison image above could also be taken in the SAME year...Just take the picture in May and the comparison in September...Sept ice volume is typically ~1/2 the May volume...Go Figure

    Please send money to help with this critical issue...

  • bhayesii said... does it not seem odd that most data you find is 1979 or later to compare with today? Why is that one might wonder? Why not look back just a few more decades? Becau...

    First, the 1979 data record is really just for the arctic/antarctic ice. There are no prior data points because October 1978 was when the first satellite was sent into orbit to measure it. Since 1979 was the first year there was a satellite in orbit measuring the data, there is no prior data comparison before that time. You sort of talk about that date as though people are choosing it for some random reason and ingoring other valid data when the truth is people are choosing it because that's when the data starts. Measuring the ice by satellite and averaging temperatures over a year are two very different sets of data.

    And there are two different places to discuss when talking about sea ice - one is the Arctic and the other is the Antarctic. Your post doesn't make that clear and you might be conflating issues. The Arctic sea ice has been decreasing since they started measuring, but it has progressed much quicker since around 2000. Don't take my word for it, here's a story from the NOAA from this year with all the measurements and information: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-minimum-arctic-sea-ice-extent

    The antarctic is not changing at as drastic a rate and scientists are trying to determine why that's the case. It's still not likely a good thing, however, for either large ice shelf to drastically decrease.

    Data on warming temperatures goes far back beyond the 1979 data point you mention. Here is the NOAA's report from last year on the data and trends: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201813

    It's hard to read the data and come to a conclusion other than the earth has been remarkably warmer over the last decade. It's reasonable to believe warmer temps are going to change and effect weather, climate, and the environment. That's how a basic ecosystem works. Changes in temperature, moisture, etc, all have impacts on plants and animals.

    If you want to believe that humans have nothing to do with the change in environment, that's your prerogative. It's a really hard point to prove for certain either way. However, nobody can really argue the data in those links. 9 of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 2005. The arctic ice shelf is decreasing steadily and has sped up considerably in the last 20 years. It's probably not a good thing for us to continue those trends so to the extent we can do things to stop it, we probably should.

    This post was edited by reservoir_dawg 5 months ago

  • reservoir_dawg said... (original post)

    bhayesii said... does it not seem odd that most data you find is 1979 or l...

    ^This

  • All I can tell you is there is a sea gauge in Laguna beach installed in 1932 and the water has not risen one centimeter. Not sure how the ocean can rise in other places as sea level is sea level. The world cycles. The humans will die but the planet will move forward. Over population is the real problem. No female should be allowed to have more than two children. It will happen in time. This pace is not sustainable.