Thoughts?

But Al Gore & ocho said it was so. Better buy some carbon credits just to be safe before we're all underwater.
 
It's Happening!

Show Me what's been Done By TARDS of this Earth to Help Prevent it?

And Don't Tell Me I'm the Problem because I Don't Drive a F'N PRIUS!

If You Add up all the WASTED Money & Obama's STIMULUS 'Study Only' Money that's been Wasted it's a F'N Joke!

So Let's Admit that Global Warming or cooling is Happening!

WTF is anybody gonna do about it?

Just like everything else!

When it's Too F'N late somebody might do something!















It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
 
Flat earthers are never going to believe any science, just the way it is.

That's fine.

What I'm seeing, while working in Alpine areas leads me to believe that the climate is warming. Conifer encroachment into areas that haven't had trees for 80+ years, something is changing.

I also find it strange to be picking tomatoes at 7232 feet in my yard in Laramie, clear into October.

Last week I took this photo off my deck at 5:44 pm on June 6th...

IMG950174.jpg


Two EF3 tornadoes in less than a week in Wyoming? The last recorded EF3 was in 1987 first ever in Albany County.

https://weather.com/storms/tornado/news/2018-06-07-wyoming-tornado-laramie-albany-county-june-6

No, there's nothing going on with climate change...
 
I can guarantee that there has been Torndoes at nite that aren't reported,picking tomatoes in October is not unheard of, far as trees millions of years ago there has been a variety of different trees .
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-10-18 AT 02:14PM (MST)[p]Like I said, flat earthers will deny any climate change, even when they're looking at it.
 
Damn, we just had one of the coolest month of May on record. Is that global warming, global cooling or just plain global change thats been with us since day one Buzz?
 
Try some research, educate yourself, get off the computer and see for yourself. Read and research from both sides of the argument, keep an open mind. Apply some common sense and critical thinking to draw your own conclusions.

That's what I do, what I've always done.

Or you can continue to live in your comfortable bubble of believing that a "cool May", in one small part of planet earth, is good enough for you to believe climate change isn't real.

I like to dive a little deeper into the issue than that...but to each their own.

Carry on.
 
Of course the climates changing, it has since the dawn of time. It's the fools who believe it's man caused and that if we just change our ways a bit we can change the climate. We aren't that powerful.


#livelikezac
 
You don't think man can change the climate?

Try lighting the fuse on a few hundred nukes...get back to me on that.
 
Straw man Buzz, we haven't caused climate change, global warming, global cooling or whatever coined phrase they're usein this week. We light a few hundred nuke nothing will matter.

#livelikezac
 
>You don't think man can change
>the climate?
>
>Try lighting the fuse on a
>few hundred nukes...get back to
>me on that.

...to this point in time Buzz....to this point in time...


..after we set off those couple hundred nukes we won't be able to text you...



497fc2397b939f19.jpg
 
Tree rings and glaciers don't lie. This too shall pass...

"Courage is being scared to death but
saddling up anyway."
 
If you can harvest tomatoes into October in Wyoming...all I can say is, if it's working, go with it.

The earth is 4.5 billion years old. 100,000 years from now earth won't even remember man being here, let alone care.
 
>Straw man Buzz, we haven't caused
>climate change, global warming, global
>cooling or whatever coined phrase
>they're usein this week. We
>light a few hundred nuke
>nothing will matter.
>
>#livelikezac

I'm not convinced either way from the mountains of research on the subject...nor am I bold enough to say for certain one way or the other.

However, when there are more people alive on planet earth right now, than have ever died, and we pump 40 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere per year...I find it difficult to believe that isn't changing things. To what level? I think that's debatable and more research and time will likely tell.

I also understand that the earth and nature are incredibly resilient, thankfully. Further, nature can take a hell of whoopin' and compensate for a lot of the crap we do.

I'm a firm believer in limiting/mitigating impacts, no matter what those impacts are...climate or otherwise. Its in our own best interest to do so and also to continue research on climate issues, population issues, disease issues, etc. etc. etc.. That is if we're interested in the long-haul, which some are and which some aren't.

I refuse to listen to anyone that emphatically states that global climate change isn't, or is, happening without considering both sides of the issue and considering that humans may be contributing.
 
People/Governments of this Earth Ain't Too Smart!

I Said 40+ Years ago that Most Vehicles could be Powered by Natural Gas!

How bout Hydrogen?

I've also said:

When We Have to do it,We Will!

It won't be to Save you any F'N Money Neither!














I know so many people in so many places
They make allot of money but they got sad faces

It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-11-18 AT 02:02AM (MST)[p]
>>Straw man Buzz, we haven't caused
>>climate change, global warming, global
>>cooling or whatever coined phrase
>>they're usein this week. We
>>light a few hundred nuke
>>nothing will matter.
>>
>>#livelikezac
>
>I'm not convinced either way from
>the mountains of research on
>the subject...nor am I bold
>enough to say for certain
>one way or the other.
>

I agree, but what is being touted as undisputable fact is man is responsible for climate change. I need more evidence before I buy that.


>However, when there are more people
>alive on planet earth right
>now, than have ever died,
>and we pump 40 billion
>tons of CO2 into the
>atmosphere per year...I find it
>difficult to believe that isn't
>changing things. To what level?
>I think that's debatable and
>more research and time will
>likely tell.
>

I agree with part of this. My question is how much CO2 has been released by the two current active volcanoes? I bet man ain't a patch to em!


>I also understand that the earth
>and nature are incredibly resilient,
>thankfully. Further, nature can take
>a hell of whoopin' and
>compensate for a lot of
>the crap we do.
>


The is the statement of your post that I agree with the most!

>I'm a firm believer in limiting/mitigating
>impacts, no matter what those
>impacts are...climate or otherwise. Its
>in our own best interest
>to do so and also
>to continue research on climate
>issues, population issues, disease issues,
>etc. etc. etc..

Agree, but a model can't replicate our world. What's being touted as sound undisputable science is simply theory based off models. Here's an example, vinyl siding was supposed to have a 20+ year life as models indicated. The trouble was the sun's effect at a mile above sea level couldn't be replicated. After 5yrs in the Colorado sun it looked like it was shot with a shotgun after the first hail storm!

That is
>if we're interested in the
>long-haul, which some are and
>which some aren't.
>
>I refuse to listen to anyone
>that emphatically states that global
>climate change isn't, or is,
>happening without considering both sides
>of the issue and considering
>that humans may be contributing.
>

I believe that it is happening, as it has since the dawn of time. Until I see evidence it's man caused I will continue to be skeptical of those that say we can change the temp of the world by bein a horseback vs driving a combustion engine. If they call me a flat earther or a science denier, or they condicendingly tell me I need to educate myself, I know they're a kool-aid drinkin fool and the conversation is pointless.


I haven't heard of any damage in Laramie from the tornado and I hope you and yours were spared any.


#livelikezac
 
>People/Governments of this Earth Ain't Too
>Smart!
>
>I Said 40+ Years ago that
>Most Vehicles could be Powered
>by Natural Gas!
>
>How bout Hydrogen?
>
>I've also said:
>
>When We Have to do it,We
>Will!
>
>It won't be to Save you
>any F'N Money Neither!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I know so many people in
>so many places
>They make allot of money but
>they got sad faces
>
>It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
Like Spade and the Guy who ate dinner with Obama ?
 
Climate change is real and everyone knows it. it's a waste of time discussing it with anyone too stupid to admit it.

I've tried for years to get these mouthbreathers to admit ice melts when it gets too warm but they refuse to go there. nuff said.













Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-11-18 AT 10:00AM (MST)[p]DW, to answer your question, regarding this comment: I agree with part of this. My question is how much CO2 has been released by the two current active volcanoes? I bet man ain't a patch to em!

Here is where research is your friend...according to the USGS, volcanoes annually release anywhere from 200-600 million tons of CO2 into the air/oceans annually. The Mt. St. Helens eruption released about 10 million tons of CO2.

No question a significant source of CO2, but when compared to the 40 BILLION tons of CO2 released by human causes, not nearly as significant as one would guess.

So, for volcanoes to reach the level of CO2 emissions caused by humans, we'd need to have about 3-5 Mt. St. Helens eruptions, PER DAY, to reach the same level as what humans are causing.

Plus, there is lots of peer reviewed science regarding the total impacts of volcanic activity, in particular things to do with sulfuric acid, dust, and ash. The science would suggest volcanic activity could cause a cooling effect on climate.
 
>
> Climate change is real and
>everyone knows it. it's
>a waste of time discussing
>it with anyone too stupid
>to admit it.
>
> I've tried for years to
>get these mouthbreathers to admit
>ice melts when it gets
>too warm but they refuse
>to go there.
>nuff said.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Stay Thirsty My Friends

The ice in your crown royal melts also
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-11-18
>AT 10:00?AM (MST)

>
>DW, to answer your question, regarding
>this comment: I agree with
>part of this. My question
>is how much CO2 has
>been released by the two
>current active volcanoes? I bet
>man ain't a patch to
>em!

>
>Here is where research is your
>friend...according to the USGS, volcanoes
>annually release anywhere from 200-600
>million tons of CO2 into
>the air/oceans annually. The Mt.
>St. Helens eruption released about
>10 million tons of CO2.
>
>
>No question a significant source of
>CO2, but when compared to
>the 40 BILLION tons of
>CO2 released by human causes,
>not nearly as significant as
>one would guess.
>
>So, for volcanoes to reach the
>level of CO2 emissions caused
>by humans, we'd need to
>have about 3-5 Mt. St.
>Helens eruptions, PER DAY, to
>reach the same level as
>what humans are causing.
>
>Plus, there is lots of peer
>reviewed science regarding the total
>impacts of volcanic activity, in
>particular things to do with
>sulfuric acid, dust, and ash.
>The science would suggest volcanic
>activity could cause a cooling
>effect on climate.

The trouble I have with it buzz is how accurate are their measurements? A quick search will tell you the total human caused CO2 varies widely by the "experts". The only thing they seem to be consistent on is that human activity contributes less than 1% of the total CO2 in our atmosphere and that plants need CO2 to grow. Outside of those two statements I have a hard time buyin much of their model based theories. Both sides pick and choose things to prove their theories. They basically set out to prove a theory rather than collect all data and develope a theory. Essentially the exact opposite of the way science was taught and practiced before this arguement began.


#livelikezac
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-11-18 AT 11:45AM (MST)[p]DW,

As to how accurate are their measurements? Well, what I base that on is the best available science and I generally believe there is a "range". Its not difficult to research how the measurements are taken and look at the tabulated as well as raw data. I 100% agree regarding your statement that there is unanimous agreement that we contribute less than, but close to 1%. The rub lies in how much that additional 1% we're contributing is additive to the over-all climate.

I view it like a watershed...many tributaries combine to make a river. How many tributaries can we dewater, for example, before it impacts the over-all river? Is it 1%? 5%?10%? Who knows, but there is no debate that at some point when we dewater tributaries, there is going to be impacts to the watershed/river as a whole.

That's where I'm at with climate science and why I don't feel 100% convinced either way.

What I am convinced about though, is that again using the watershed analogy, if I don't want to negatively impact the over-all health of the watershed, probably not the best idea to start dewatering any tributaries. Or at the very least, taking a hard, scientific look and studying and continuing to research, what happens if I choose to.

Same with CO2 emissions from human causes. Realize we aren't going to eliminate all CO2 emissions, but why not take measures to mitigate what we can and continue to study the impacts? If through that science, we find ways to control our impacts, just do it.

Again, the agenda's on both side of the issue are what creates a situation where people like you and I don't know what to believe. That's very unfortunate, because at the end of the day, IMO, we both want to know what the science and facts can prove. I also believe we both want what's best for our environment, our planet, and our future.

DW, I really appreciate the honest and sincere dialogue you've given here...and I hear and respect what you've said.
 
It was good to see rational thoughts communicated on this forum for once.

I have many thoughts on this topic. I agree that this is a natural cycle that has happened and will continue to happen for as long as this planet exists. I also believe that humans do/have contributed to it. With that being said, I am not convinced that our CO2 emissions are the larger contributing factor.

But it was good to see some thoughtful discussion on this.

Thanks guys.
 
Anybody who doesn't think man can change the environment please explain the dust bowl era.

Local weather patterns are not a rebuttal to global warming. The only debate is whether man is the most contributing factor. Of course, when we have the answer it will probably be too late.

Not everyone believes it's okay to whore out the Earth because the rapture is coming.

__________________________
http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos_2017/6717815301.jpg
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom