The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 10 of 54 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 540

Thread: Speaking of Global Warming

  1. #91
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,694

    Default

    I actually thought water vapor was the most culpable of the greenhouse gasses ... and hasn't the US gotten away from the HFCs for quite a while?

    The science seems not to have figured out why with CO2 so high, the earth temps have been in a cooling trend.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  2. #92
    Senior Member zeus3925's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    West Twin Cities Metro, MN
    Posts
    2,050

    Default

    HFC destroy the ozone layer which then allows in ultra violet which is detrimental to life. Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 and rising ocean temperature may release more from hydrates from bodies of water near the Artic.

    Gerry, what is the evidence behind your statement the earth is in a cooling trend? When did this cooling trend begin?
    Last edited by zeus3925; 06-12-2013 at 10:23 PM.
    Zeus

    I don't want to feed an ugly dog!

  3. #93
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,694

    Default

    Zeus, I misspoke ... it is not in a cooling trend, but rather shows that warming has not increased in the last 15 years. The stat that I've seen posted was that 2012 was .11F higher, essentially negligible.

    From National Review:
    Global warming, contrary to the predictions of the best climate models, is not accelerating. It is slowing, and some estimates show it having been reversed. The warmest year on record was 1998, and there has been significantly less warming in the last 15 years than there was in the 20 years before that. The Economist, which supports measures to control greenhouse-gas emissions and has been a reliable hotbed of warming alarmism, conceded: “There’s no way around the fact that this reprieve for the planet is bad news for proponents of policies, such as carbon taxes and emissions treaties, meant to slow warming by moderating the release of greenhouse gases. . . . They will become harder, if not impossible, to sell to the public, which will feel, not unreasonably, that the scientific and media establishment has cried wolf.”
    Have been reading several bits and pieces in different articles. Obama's present speeches are quoting old stats. The one about 97% of scientists being in agreement on warming is no longer true.

    Point being that CO2 is a rather negligible consideration in the whole idea of global warming, yet all these scientists are hanging their hats on CO2. And there is a lot of carelessness in equating dangerous pollution like mercury and lead to CO2. Saying the opposition wants dirty air and dirty water because they oppose economy-strangling over CO2 is just plain not true

    Obama's proposed executive order will reach its tentacles into every part of the economy.

    How much impact will these measures taken by the US impact the global situation? Will India, China and Russia care to stifle their economies? It doesn't seem like China and Russia care much about cooperation with the US in much of anything lately. And Third World countries who have emerging economies aren't too willing to give up use of cheap fuels to keep their populations above survival level.

    Let's assume that there is some virtue in limiting CO2. Congress would not legislate the things that this executive order is supposed to make reality. Is there no recourse to an executive order? I thought the whole point of our Constitution was checks and balances. If executive orders can circumvent the legislature, why do we have a legislature? How can the executive branch decide to change the laws; or, in the case of immigration, choose not to enforce them?
    Last edited by Gerry Clinchy; 06-26-2013 at 07:17 PM.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  4. #94
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Pac NW
    Posts
    4,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    The one about 97% of scientists being in agreement on warming is no longer true.
    From CATO's 2012 Annual Report -
    Quote Originally Posted by CATO
    Back in 2009 the EPA issued a massive report to be used in regulating carbon dioxide emissions. According to CATO Senior Fellow Patrick J Michaels, every paragraph was missing information. In October Michaels released a comprehensive addendum which - paragraph by paragraph & page by page - adds back vital information omitted from the original report. Michaels noted that "calling this an "addendum" is a tongue in cheek jab at the substantial relevant science the authors of the USGCRP (United States Global Change Research Program) report left on the cutting room floor while crafting their version
    Anyone doubt CATO's authenticity? I think it to be when folks want to be considered knowledgeable on this forum but are unable to figure someone is "cooking the books" &/or are unwilling to admit same.
    __________________________

    Marvin S

    Everyone's friend is No One's friend

    Someday your life will flash before your eyes. It's your responsibility to make sure it's worth watching!

  5. #95
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    For all you Global Warming Nuts...Democratic Liberal....some facts: Climate Change/Global Warming is based on Junk Science and incomplete data.....!Source:
    "Global Warming Basics." By James D. Agresti and SchuylerDugle. Just Facts, August 15, 2011. Revised 7/20/12. http://www.justfacts.com/globalwarming.basics.asp

    As of August 2011, 9,029 Ph.D.scientists including 3,805 atmospheric, earth, or environmental scientists havesigned a petition stating:

    There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.[204][205][206]


    When talking about Global Warming:
    According to satellite data correlated and adjusted by theNational Space Science and Technology Center, the average temperature of theEarth's lower atmosphere increased by 0.52F (0.29C) between the 1980s and2000s, mostly during 1998-2010:
    *Sources ofuncertainty in satellite-derived temperatures involve variations in satelliteorbits, variations in measuring instruments, and variations in the calculationsused to translate raw data into temperatures.[34][35]

    Sources of uncertainty in surfacetemperature data involve "very incomplete" temperature records in theearlier years,[38] "changesin measurement methods,"[39]"calculation and reporting errors,"[40][41][42][43][44][45][46] dataadjustments that are performed when instruments are moved to differentlocations,[47] instrumentprecision,[48] instrument positioning,[49] and missingdocumentation/raw data.[50][51]

    * A 2006 paper in the Journal ofGeophysical Research that calculates uncertainties in surface temperaturedata states that a

    Definitive assessment of uncertainties is impossible, because it is always possible that some unknown error has contaminated the data, and no quantitative allowance can be made for such unknowns.[52]

  6. #96
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,694

    Default

    The fellas who proposed this whole global warming thing aren't even sure anymore.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...-prove-it.html

    It has a nice chart for those who are into charts.
    Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did.


    The data does suggest a plateau, he admitted, and without a major El Nino event – the sudden, dramatic warming of the southern Pacific which takes place unpredictably and always has a huge effect on global weather – ‘it could go on for a while’.


    Like Prof Curry, Prof Jones also admitted that the climate models were imperfect: ‘We don’t fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don’t fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don’t know what natural variability is doing.’

    Mr. Jones has actually contradicted himself:

    Yet he [Jones] insisted that 15 or 16 years is not a significant period: pauses of such length had always been expected, he said.

    Yet in 2009, when the plateau was already becoming apparent and being discussed by scientists, he told a colleague in one of the Climategate emails: ‘Bottom line: the “no upward trend” has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’


    But although that point has now been passed, he said that he hadn’t changed his mind about the models’ gloomy predictions: ‘I still think that the current decade which began in 2010 will be warmer by about 0.17 degrees than the previous one, which was warmer than the Nineties.’


    Only if that did not happen would he seriously begin to wonder whether something more profound might be happening. In other words, though five years ago he seemed to be saying that 15 years without warming would make him ‘worried’, that period has now become 20 years.
    The most depressing feature of this debate is that anyone who questions the alarmist, doomsday scenario will automatically be labelled a climate change ‘denier’, and accused of jeopardising the future of humanity.


    So let’s be clear. Yes: global warming is real, and some of it at least has been caused by the CO2 emitted by fossil fuels. But the evidence is beginning to suggest that it may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications.


    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  7. #97
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    Zeus3925, Henry V, Golddogs, and other confused or liberals on Climate change...the two posts above give the 'current' facts about climate change in that the research and related data is not conclusive and does not verify anything....it is all Junk Science! Al Gore along with the Bias Media have created this problem and they are driving it because it sells and money can be made...nothing more!

  8. #98
    Senior Member zeus3925's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    West Twin Cities Metro, MN
    Posts
    2,050

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampcollielover View Post
    For all you Global Warming Nuts...Democratic Liberal....some facts: Climate Change/Global Warming is based on Junk Science and incomplete data.....!Source:
    "Global Warming Basics." By James D. Agresti and SchuylerDugle. Just Facts, August 15, 2011. Revised 7/20/12. http://www.justfacts.com/globalwarming.basics.asp

    As of August 2011, 9,029 Ph.D.scientists including 3,805 atmospheric, earth, or environmental scientists havesigned a petition stating:

    There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.[204][205][206]


    When talking about Global Warming:
    According to satellite data correlated and adjusted by theNational Space Science and Technology Center, the average temperature of theEarth's lower atmosphere increased by 0.52F (0.29C) between the 1980s and2000s, mostly during 1998-2010:
    *Sources ofuncertainty in satellite-derived temperatures involve variations in satelliteorbits, variations in measuring instruments, and variations in the calculationsused to translate raw data into temperatures.[34][35]

    Sources of uncertainty in surfacetemperature data involve "very incomplete" temperature records in theearlier years,[38] "changesin measurement methods,"[39]"calculation and reporting errors,"[40][41][42][43][44][45][46] dataadjustments that are performed when instruments are moved to differentlocations,[47] instrumentprecision,[48] instrument positioning,[49] and missingdocumentation/raw data.[50][51]

    * A 2006 paper in the Journal ofGeophysical Research that calculates uncertainties in surface temperaturedata states that a

    Definitive assessment of uncertainties is impossible, because it is always possible that some unknown error has contaminated the data, and no quantitative allowance can be made for such unknowns.[52]
    This dude doesn't know twit about remote sensing!
    Last edited by zeus3925; 06-30-2013 at 09:05 PM.
    Zeus

    I don't want to feed an ugly dog!

  9. #99
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    Hey zenu3925...Glad you saw my post.....facts are hard to face sometimes! Like most Lib's your only place to go when presented with facts is name calling.... Which Union trained and brainwashed you?

  10. #100
    Senior Member Gun_Dog2002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Mohawk Valley
    Posts
    8,642
    Paul Cantrell
    Black Ice Retrievers
    Marcola OR

    Too many dogs to list (By some Bitch)

    https://www.facebook.com/BlackIceRetrievers
    http://gundog2002.blogspot.com/
    "Helping Hunters Train Their Dogs"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •