Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
Hahah..Another Gore prediction bites the dust...
Page <<first <prev 5 of 11 next> last>>
Dec 16, 2013 20:22:35   #
heyrob Loc: Western Washington
 
Harvey wrote:
Much is said and true about the rising of the sea levels - BUT - not anything is said about them "Rising to previous levels" - All of Florida and the Yucatan Peninsula of MX is "Old Sea Bed" those are the two I know of - I know there are many more that I don't know of..


You are absolutely right Harvey, just like the climate has never been static, and it fact was considerably warmer in the past than it is now. Sea levels were formerly much higher, higher even that ALGORE predicted is his stupid documentary. It's pretty much universally agreed now that any rise in sea levels will be far less that his dire prediction. The really amazing part is how folks are all worked up about a change of maybe a inch to an inch and a half in a decade when historically the sea level was as much as 560 feet higher than they are today. And this has been known for 5 or 6 years now.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/03/080306-sea-levels.html

Reply
Dec 16, 2013 20:23:21   #
heyrob Loc: Western Washington
 
rocketride wrote:
At the time, the cargo cult "scientists" were still Chicken Littling about global cooling.


Still going on today.

Reply
Dec 16, 2013 20:26:08   #
heyrob Loc: Western Washington
 
hondo812 wrote:
Generally speaking that is a fairly accurate assessment. Human beings are as individuals fairly bright and intelligent. As a collective...not so much. History has recorded that people congregate in areas know for natural disasters. Mount Vesuvius buried Pompei and Hurculaneum. And yet 15 million people now live in its shadow. New Orleans is built at the transition of a flood plain of the Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico below sea level. The state of Florida is an average of 11 feet above sea level and a natural target for Hurricanes. San Fransisco and L.A. are built along major fault lines. It's not a question of if. It's a question of when.

The Yellowstone Caldera was in the news recently. They discovered the magma chamber is roughly 100 times the size they thought it was. When will it go? Could be next month or 100,000 years from now, but it will go. And when it does, everything from the Mississippi to the west will be wiped out by either the blast or the ash. The rest of the planet would not do so well either.

As for Al Gore? He's sleazy like a used car salesman. He pushed his "slideshow" to make money and he's made a pile of it. There are always going to be theories of how the "end is near". It hasn't happened yet.
Generally speaking that is a fairly accurate asses... (show quote)


Well put, AL Gore is the PT Barnum of the 21st Century, there's a sucker born every minute and he's got millions of them by the wallet and laughing all the way to the bank. Suckers!

Reply
 
 
Dec 16, 2013 20:37:01   #
imntrt1 Loc: St. Louis
 
heyrob wrote:
You are absolutely right Harvey, just like the climate has never been static, and it fact was considerably warmer in the past than it is now. Sea levels were formerly much higher, higher even that ALGORE predicted is his stupid documentary. It's pretty much universally agreed now that any rise in sea levels will be far less that his dire prediction. The really amazing part is how folks are all worked up about a change of maybe a inch to an inch and a half in a decade when historically the sea level was as much as 560 feet higher than they are today. And this has been known for 5 or 6 years now.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/03/080306-sea-levels.html
You are absolutely right Harvey, just like the cli... (show quote)


Interesting article and eye opening. I keep waiting for the big quake on the West Coast so that my property in Missouri will have a nice view of the pacific Ocean.

Reply
Dec 16, 2013 20:49:43   #
heyrob Loc: Western Washington
 
imntrt1 wrote:
Interesting article and eye opening. I keep waiting for the big quake on the West Coast so that my property in Missouri will have a nice view of the pacific Ocean.


Well at least ocean front property in Arizona. :-)

Reply
Dec 16, 2013 23:47:52   #
infocus Loc: Australia
 
sb wrote:
He wasn't wrong - he only missed it by a few years perhaps. The arctic is still melting, and has become a new geopolitical battlefield with countries vying for oil drilling rights and shipping lanes in the thawed-out arctic.


The arctic has been melting since the last ice age "finished".
The planets climate IS changing and will CONTINUE to change just as it has done since creation (put you're own philosophy on how that happened) and there is nothing mankind has done or is doing or will do that will prevent that happening.

Reply
Dec 16, 2013 23:53:03   #
infocus Loc: Australia
 
charryl wrote:
Really? I just read that the current sea ice coverage has increased by 60% over last year....and we are just now entering winter with some of the coldest temperatures recorded in both the poles.


Thank you charryl. It's nice to have a like minded person air their view. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
 
 
Dec 17, 2013 00:04:44   #
rocketride Loc: Upstate NY
 
venturer9 wrote:
*************************************************
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/the-good-news-there-has-been-a-dramatic-increase-in-arctic-sea-ice-the-bad-its-still-half-the-level-is-was-in-the-1980s-9008388.html



Here is a paragraph taken out of the total article, the URL has the full article....

The 9,000 cubic kilometres we measured in October is still very much smaller than the 20,000 cubic kilometres we estimate for the same time in the early 1980s. So today's minimum still ranks among the lowest for the past 30 years," Professor Shepherd said.

The OCTOBER ice was MEASURED
THE Early 1980's ice is ESTIMATED....

maybe we should pay alittle less attention to estimations and more to measurements..

Mike
************************************************* ... (show quote)


They can pull pretty much any numbers they want from their butts.

Reply
Dec 17, 2013 00:09:49   #
infocus Loc: Australia
 
heyrob wrote:
If you bothered to read my entire post, and the talk by Dr. Feynman you would see that what he said was completely relevant to the topic, if not addressed specifically toward it. The present debate over what was originally called Anthropogenic Global Warming, and now just Climate Change fits perfectly within what Feynman called "Cargo Cult Science". Basically it boils down to people acting like they are doing real science, but the fact that they do not follow the scientific method, they do not publish both what they claim works in their theories, as well as what does not, is proof positive that these people have a preconceived idea of what they wish to prove. In their quest to push a failked theory they will either manipulate the data (Remember Climategate?) or if an experiments sort of works once, but is not repeatable, they don't make that fact known, but only publish the data that works, and bury the part that fails. If you're not too proud to take a chance on learning something about science, watch the 20 minute video at the link I posted in that previous post. Maybe you'll learn what science is supposed to be about and how it's is supposed to be pursued.

While I clearly stated in that previous post that Feynman was not around when the global warming hype took off, the non-sense that is climate change extremism, has been around since at least the 1970's. Newsweek published and article in April 1976 link here:
http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf - about how we were heading into another mini-Ice Age, fast forward 15 to 20 years and the Global Warming doom and gloom began, and now that didn't pan out, so we'll just call it Climate Change and all the bases are covered. Funny how the scaremongers keep changing the rules of the game to try to stay relevant. Only the truly brain dead would fail to see through this BS. Ask yourself why after years of being told that higher CO2 levels were going to make the climate too warm to live, but despite the growing co2 levels the temperature has stayed pretty level for the past decade, and is now showing signs of decline. If one was true, how can it now be the opposite. Wake up people it's all a bunch of lies to separate you from your money, PERIOD.
His talk on Cargo Cult Science speaks directly of the type of pseudoscience that the present group of climate scaremongers practice.
If you bothered to read my entire post, and the ta... (show quote)


Oh my goodness - what a breath of fresh air you are heyrob. I'm glad there is still sane people in this "debate".
Another point completely glossed over by the climate change pundits is this:-
The IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) was originally set up because it was believed by scientists that the planet was COOLING and that reduced sunlight would make it impossible to grow sufficient food to feed the world.
We have gone from that to this "global warming BS"
Interesting book on this " The Real Global Warming Disaster" by Christopher Booker.

Reply
Dec 17, 2013 00:15:40   #
infocus Loc: Australia
 
riverlass wrote:
If you look at the history of the world, there are great changes over long periods of time. Climate change has always been a factor. It seems to me that MAN is the one thing that constantly tries to control nature because of his own fears and greed...and eventually, will go the way of the dinosaurs.
Yes, we need to take care not to pollute the environment for future generations, but this doomsday scenario is short sighted and, I suspect, money driven... and political.


Yeah riverlass. I'm with you 100%

Reply
Dec 17, 2013 00:42:27   #
tpaschal1696
 
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

"Including 2013, the linear trend in November ice extent is –4.9% per decade relative to the 1981 to 2010 mean, or –53,500 square kilometers per year (–20,700 square miles per year)."

Reply
 
 
Dec 17, 2013 01:25:31   #
Lazy Old Coot Loc: Gainesville, Florida
 
If I remember correctly it was around the seventies or eighties that the scientist were predicting the earth was entering a new ice age! ....... Coot

DEBJENROB wrote:
What is wrong with you .... you quote a physicist who died in 1988 to make a point about a 21st Century problem .... global warming wasn't a perceived problem in 1988 ..... unless you have the ability to channel him ... find better experts to support your minority opinion ...

Reply
Dec 17, 2013 01:25:45   #
rocketride Loc: Upstate NY
 
tpaschal1696 wrote:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

"Including 2013, the linear trend in November ice extent is –4.9% per decade relative to the 1981 to 2010 mean, or –53,500 square kilometers per year (–20,700 square miles per year)."


And in what year did they start actually measuring that extent, as opposed to estimating it after the fact.

Reply
Dec 17, 2013 08:37:42   #
DEBJENROB Loc: DELRAY BEACH FL
 
Lazy Old Coot wrote:
If I remember correctly it was around the seventies or eighties that the scientist were predicting the earth was entering a new ice age! ....... Coot


What is interesting about this discussion is that we all have our beliefs and subsequently read researchers who support that belief .... and we quote them and quote them ... we take their word as gospel .... I have always believed that in almost all cases ... if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, a reasonable person would assume it is a duck ...that being said ... a vast majority of the scientific community believe that global warming is occurring and it is caused by human activity ....now there is a remote possibly that all of these scientists are wrong ..... but it is unlikely .... so does heyrob know that there is no such thing as global warming or do I know with certainty that there is .... NO ... heyrob has as much background in climatology as I do ....NONE ... we read those who support our opinion formed by a lack of expertise .... but I do know this .... if 9 weather forecasters out of 10 say ..it is going to rain ... I carry an umbrella .... yes the one could be correct .... but I would be a fool to dismiss the opinion of the 9 ....

Reply
Dec 17, 2013 09:45:56   #
rocketride Loc: Upstate NY
 
DEBJENROB wrote:
What is interesting about this discussion is that we all have our beliefs and subsequently read researchers who support that belief .... and we quote them and quote them ... we take their word as gospel .... I have always believed that in almost all cases ... if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, a reasonable person would assume it is a duck ...that being said ... a vast majority of the scientific community believe that global warming is occurring and it is caused by human activity ....now there is a remote possibly that all of these scientists are wrong ..... but it is unlikely .... so does heyrob know that there is no such thing as global warming or do I know with certainty that there is .... NO ... heyrob has as much background in climatology as I do ....NONE ... we read those who support our opinion formed by a lack of expertise .... but I do know this .... if 9 weather forecasters out of 10 say ..it is going to rain ... I carry an umbrella .... yes the one could be correct .... but I would be a fool to dismiss the opinion of the 9 ....
What is interesting about this discussion is that ... (show quote)


I tend to be of the opinion that the Earth is about ready to start sliding into the next scheduled ice age some time in the next year or 2,000.
Could it be that AGW might be our savior? It's pretty clear that a full ice age would suck orders of magnitude worse (in terms of human habitability and the ability to maintain a technological civilization) than any of the calamities predicted by the more "grown up" warmists. (The real nutters predict things like supersonic hurricanes and premature "Venusification" of the planet.*)

The question is whether we can pump enough greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to keep the place from seriously freezing over when that time comes.

* It will, apparently, become Venus-like, sooner or later, unless our descendants do some serious engineering. The astrophysicists tell us that the sun's luminosity was only about 70% of its current value when it stabilized into the main sequence and can be expected to increase to about half again (or possibly double) its current value by the time it starts to leave the main sequence, which, at some point, will move the habitable zone entirely outside Earth's orbit.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 11 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.