Keystone passes Senate

[Human]

Oh come on when was that 30 years ago? And whats wrong with southerners? That's what we send our reps to do to represent us. And if they rejected this data...Im sure its because its full of left wing type tree-hugger stuff

It's full of years of research by world renowned geologists, engineers, marine biologists, meteorologists and journalists that cover affected regions. It doesn't matter that it was thirty years ago, the reason it happened 30 years ago with tobacco and its health effects is the same reason it happens today with fossil fuels and their climate effects -- money!

 

[Billyd]

Might be getting into a little bit of conspiracy here but it is my understanding that Tesla was advocating for a DC electrical grid while Edison was for AC. DC is stored easier and is cheaper to make....hmmmmm.

Edison was for DC and Tesla was for AC. Large scale distribution of DC in the quantities needed today would be virtually impossible. Also generation of DC is much more expensive.

Solar power is a viable substitute for power generation, but we will always need a primary source.

If we combine natural gas and coal, we have about 150 years of fossil fuels left. That's assuming the current rate of world industrialization. As that rate increases, the fossil fuels quantity will decrease. Alternative fuels resources must be explored, along with conservation of fossil fuels.

I have a suggestion. If the world would learn to live together, rather than fight continuous wars, the energy crisis would be easy to resolve. Unless the Lord comes and establishes His new kingdom on Earth, that isn't going to happen!

 

[Mitspa]

It's full of years of research by world renowned geologists, engineers, marine biologists, meteorologists and journalists that cover affected regions. It doesn't matter that it was thirty years ago, the reason it happened 30 years ago with tobacco and its health effects is the same reason it happens today with fossil fuels and their climate effects -- money!

Yea heard Al Gore say all that stuff before...but its all just guess work and propaganda!

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Republicans are notorious for opposing scientific evidence.

They don't ignore scientific evidence. They ignore the garbage that leftists and enviro-nuts try to pass off as science.

 

[Human]

They don't ignore scientific evidence. They ignore the garbage that leftists and enviro-nuts try to pass off as science.

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence

NASA, a group of arguably the most well trained and intelligent scientists in the world, on how human instigated climate change is a real thing. Care to share with us your abundant scientific knowledge on how they're wrong?

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence

NASA, a group of arguably the most well trained and intelligent scientists in the world ...

Tell me, how does the ability to launch payloads and astronauts into space with minimal risk and rare failure -- a questionable ability at that, now that they don't have a rocket or a space vehicle to work with -- qualify NASA scientists to have an academic viewpoint on human-instigated "climate change"? They are entirely working the fields of astrophysics, aerospace engineering, propulsion theory, etc. They rely on NOAA to provide their meteorological data for launches, so don't try to putt a weatherman out of the hat to explain yourself.

I say that last part to warn you, consider how often your own side has insisted the "lack of a field-specific degree" in climate theory or meteorology negates the opinions of countless experts in the various sciences who produce peer-reviewed research that tends to disprove human involvement in climate change. I'll await your response, and enjoy the pretzel you're going to have to twist yourself into to explain your answer.

 

[Human]

Tell me, how does the ability to launch payloads and astronauts into space with minimal risk and rare failure -- a questionable ability at that, now that they don't have a rocket or a space vehicle to work with -- qualify NASA scientists to have an academic viewpoint on human-instigated "climate change"? They are entirely working the fields of astrophysics, aerospace engineering, propulsion theory, etc

.

http://www.nasa.gov/about/career

As you can read from that link, '' I think the advice that I would give to any kids who want to be astronauts is to make sure that they realize that NASA is looking for people with a whole variety of backgrounds: they are looking for medical doctors, microbiologists, geologists, physicists, electrical engineers. So find something that you really like and then pursue it as far as you can and NASA is apt to be interested in that profession."

They rely on NOAA to provide their meteorological data for launches, so don't try to putt a weatherman out of the hat to explain yourself.

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/amu

As you can see, NASA have a meteorological department; launches aren't NASA's only function.

I say that last part to warn you, consider how often your own side has insisted the "lack of a field-specific degree" in climate theory or meteorology negates the opinions of countless experts in the various sciences who produce peer-reviewed research that tends to disprove human involvement in climate change.

Give me a link to one such peer reviewed article that ''tends to disprove climate change'', written in the last 50 years.

I'll await your response, and enjoy the pretzel you're going to have to twist yourself into to explain your answer.

Sorry to disappoint.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

"... medical doctors, microbiologists, geologists, physicists, electrical engineers."

Not a meterologist nor climatologist in the bunch, just like I said.

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/amu

As you can see, NASA have a meteorological department; launches aren't NASA's only function.

From your own link: "The Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) is a tri-agency cooperative effort for transitioning new techniques from the research arena to improve operational weather forecasting and analysis in support of the National space program."

No climate change research mentioned.

Give me a link to one such peer reviewed article that ''tends to disprove climate change'', written in the last 50 years.

I can do better than that. I can give you a peer-reviewed paper indicating that anthropomorphic climate change advocates are in the minority, and that they delude themselves in addition to attempting to delude the public.

Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change

Sorry to disappoint.

I'm not disappointed at all. You've twisted the truth and attempted to misdirect the issue just as I expected you would.

 

[Human]

Not a meterologist nor climatologist in the bunch, just like I said.

From your own link: "The Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) is a tri-agency cooperative effort for transitioning new techniques from the research arena to improve operational weather forecasting and analysis in support of the National space program."

What is the difference between weather and climate? And why is forecasting weather, and the data thereof, important to understand changing climate patterns? The database of knowledge thereof is of fundamental importance in understanding climate shifts. Also, the point of the recruiter listing job types isn't to give an exhaustive list, it is to emphasize that any scientific discipline, taken further enough, is important for NASA in their employment practice, because it is functionally important in their scientific studies and applications.

I can do better than that. I can give you a peer-reviewed paper indicating that anthropomorphic climate change advocates are in the minority, and that they delude themselves in addition to attempting to delude the public.

Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change

This paper is debating the validity of a scientist's claim to authority in denying or advocating climate change from a sociological and psychological perspective. It contains virtually no actual climate scientific claims. As it states though, the majority of dissenters and deniers work for oil companies.

Regardless, an international consensus most certainly exists (as is in the paper). Here is its source: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/press-ar4/ipcc-flyer-low.pdf

 

[wisebeardman]

I have heard that polar North has been shifting towards Russia by about 40 kilometers a year.....that in itself would cause warming and cooling to hit certain parts of the northern and southern hemispheres.......I noticed about 10 years ago that the sun did not seem to set in the same position that it did when I was a kid and then heard the report about polar north shifting towards Russia.......

I also read a report about that massive dam built by China and how it change the revolution of the earth a bit...and that the airports have had to adjust the gps systems on the planes as the earth slowly shifts polar north towards Russia...

And even the massive earth quake and tsunami that hit Indonesia lifted St. Louis by x amount of inches.......

Just some reports I have read that adds to (global warming and or cooling)

I noticed a couple years ago, the sun didn't seem to set nor rise where I remember as a kid in the late 80s early 90s. MATTER of face. I can remember looking right down the alley to the west on Jun 21+/- and the sun setting very close in line. NOW the sun seems to set more to my NW.

But as for this man made climate change garbage, WHY has every single planet in the system seen warmer temps? it would appear man made global warming is happening on all the planets... oh wait. man is only on one planet.... welp so much for man made.

ALSO lets think.. a little over 1,000 years ago the earth was warmer... I don't think the Vikings had Hummers and 747's and factories....

 

[Human]

I noticed a couple years ago, the sun didn't seem to set nor rise where I remember as a kid in the late 80s early 90s. MATTER of face. I can remember looking right down the alley to the west on Jun 21+/- and the sun setting very close in line. NOW the sun seems to set more to my NW.

But as for this man made climate change garbage, WHY has every single planet in the system seen warmer temps? it would appear man made global warming is happening on all the planets... oh wait. man is only on one planet.... welp so much for man made.

ALSO lets think.. a little over 1,000 years ago the earth was warmer... I don't think the Vikings had Hummers and 747's and factories....

The planets closer to the sun are warmer. The planets further from the sun are cooler. This planet retains heat by atmospheric gases, namely CO2. More CO2 in the atmopshere means more heat retention. So, as the co2 content in the atmosphere gets higher, the planet's ability to get rid of heat gets lower. Therefore; higher average global temperatues.

 

[wisebeardman]

The planets closer to the sun are warmer. The planets further from the sun are cooler. This planet retains heat by atmospheric gases, namely CO2. More CO2 in the atmopshere means more heat retention. So, as the co2 content in the atmosphere gets higher, the planet's ability to get rid of heat gets lower. Therefore; higher average global temperatues.

hello mr brick wall, ALL the planets have been warming.. Earth is a planet. ALL of them have seen warming. and you know man is only on one planet...

 

[Human]

hello mr brick wall, ALL the planets have been warming.. Earth is a planet. ALL of them have seen warming. and you know man is only on one planet...

Planet temperatures naturally fluctuate responsively to their proximity to the sun in their orbits. However, Earth is warming disproportionately to the levels it should from orbital proximity and natural seasonal changes alone, since the advent of industry. This would make sense, because CO2 retains heat and the Co2 levels of the atmosphere are continually increased by the by-products of industry.

It really isn't complex.

 

[wisebeardman]

Planet temperatures naturally fluctuate responsively to their proximity to the sun in their orbits. However, Earth is warming disproportionately to the levels it should from orbital proximity and natural seasonal changes alone, since the advent of industry. This would make sense, because CO2 retains heat and the Co2 levels of the atmosphere are continually increased by the by-products of industry.

It really isn't complex.

again you just do not get it, 1,000 years ago Greenland was warm. go back farther the Sahara was green. go back farther where I live was under a lot of ice.

but go ahead believe in the scam of man made global warmin.. er climate change.. which used to be called global cooling in the 70s.

 

[dcontroversal]

I noticed a couple years ago, the sun didn't seem to set nor rise where I remember as a kid in the late 80s early 90s. MATTER of face. I can remember looking right down the alley to the west on Jun 21+/- and the sun setting very close in line. NOW the sun seems to set more to my NW.

But as for this man made climate change garbage, WHY has every single planet in the system seen warmer temps? it would appear man made global warming is happening on all the planets... oh wait. man is only on one planet.... welp so much for man made.

ALSO lets think.. a little over 1,000 years ago the earth was warmer... I don't think the Vikings had Hummers and 747's and factories....

Exactly and same here.....the house I grew up in in the 70's and 80's.......the sun set during the summer dead over the house across the street and I noticed about 10 years ago when driving by there during the summer that the sun was setting in a different location...people thought I was mistaken until the info came out about polar north shifting......

 

[Sirk]

The earth is enduring both global warming and global cooling. This is based on my research where I discovered that the side facing the sun gets warmer and the side away from the sun gets cooler. Pretty fascinating stuff.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Exactly and same here.....the house I grew up in in the 70's and 80's.......the sun set during the summer dead over the house across the street and I noticed about 10 years ago when driving by there during the summer that the sun was setting in a different location...people thought I was mistaken until the info came out about polar north shifting......

Yes down here in the Ozarks of Missouri the sun is setting in a different location then it use to do.
That and plus not to mention from what I have seen the seasons are one month off. Growing up the worst of our winter weather was in February and by March it was over. Now for the past 5 years at least the worst has come in March and been over by either mid March or April.......

 

[p_rehbein]

Polar shifts are nothing new.............or, rather magnetic shifts isn't it?

As for sun setting, depending on the time of year, the sun here sets in different points of reference all the time.

 

[Desdichado]

The earth is enduring both global warming and global cooling. This is based on my research where I discovered that the side facing the sun gets warmer and the side away from the sun gets cooler. Pretty fascinating stuff.

I hear tell it gets colder when the sun goes down too.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

The earth is enduring both global warming and global cooling. This is based on my research where I discovered that the side facing the sun gets warmer and the side away from the sun gets cooler. Pretty fascinating stuff.

Wow! I think you should write a peer-reviewed paper on that phenomenon, don't you?