TEMPS IN YOUR AREA???

FA43BD67-D8FE-46DA-978E-48D076AD1F22.jpeg

I don’t work outside much after 11 am
 
The global warming crowd does nothing but spread BUL###IT. The earth has experienced several changes on temperatures and sea levels over the last billion years. Check your history on this. This is a natural occurrence that can't be changed by man. Let's keep the air and water as clean as possible but we shouldn't allow the idiots to ruin our country 9n a farce.
 
larrbo said:
The global warming crowd does nothing but spread BUL###IT. The earth has experienced several changes on temperatures and sea levels over the last billion years. Check your history on this. This is a natural occurrence that can't be changed by man. Let's keep the air and water as clean as possible but we shouldn't allow the idiots to ruin our country 9n a farce.
Click to expand...

It seems the deniers are equally responsible when it comes to ruining the country. When it comes to climate (as with most things), the truth lies somewhere between the stories spread by extremists on either side of the discussion. While man cannot prevent natural climate cycles, the data shows that carbon dioxide levels do correlate to temperature, and that they have risen sharply since the beginning of the industrial revolution.
 
bullskin said:
It seems the deniers are equally responsible when it comes to ruining the country. When it comes to climate (as with most things), the truth lies somewhere between the stories spread by extremists on either side of the discussion. While man cannot prevent natural climate cycles, the data shows that carbon dioxide levels do correlate to temperature, and that they have risen sharply since the beginning of the industrial revolution.
Click to expand...
Well, that's what they have been saying, that CO2 levels cause temperatures to rise, but when it didn't happen, they adjusted the temperature data to match their theory. They had to get the hockey stick graph somehow.

Alterations To The US Temperature Record | Real Climate Science

realclimatescience.com realclimatescience.com
 
eelgrass said:
Well, that's what they have been saying, that CO2 levels cause temperatures to rise, but when it didn't happen, they adjusted the temperature data to match their theory. They had to get the hockey stick graph somehow.

Alterations To The US Temperature Record | Real Climate Science

realclimatescience.com realclimatescience.com
Click to expand...

Hello Eel. The data that I have seen altered was collected over the past century or so, and NASA explains the reasons in the link below. In a nutshell, they have attempted to correct inconsistencies that result from differences in sampling and measurement technique over time.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/04/03/2023-06310/conservation-and-landscape-health

Of course, the real concern is not what happens from year-to-year (since other variables also have an impact), but rather the long-term pattern that results. I do not believe anyone disagrees that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide exist, and when confronted with the longer term data regarding atmospheric CO2 levels it becomes clear that recent increases are reason for concern.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/04/03/2023-06310/conservation-and-landscape-health

For those distrustful of data and the motives of scientists, perhaps the weather outside provides the evidence they need, one way or the other. In the end, the data presented by thousands of climatologists who are convinced of these changes is more convincing than the misinterpretation of one retired electrician who maintains that all others are involved in massive conspiracy.
 
bullskin said:
n the end, the data presented by thousands of climatologists who are convinced of these changes is more convincing than the misinterpretation of one retired electrician who maintains that all others are involved in massive conspiracy.
Click to expand...
A retired electrician?

 
eelgrass said:
A retired electrician?

Click to expand...

The Real Climate Science link provided is managed by Tony Heller--an ex-Electrical Engineer, if I remember correctly.

Out of curiosity, what do you make of his charts? It seems that life expectancy and death by natural disaster have both decreased as CO2 level have risen over the past century, while crop production has improved. He appears to be making the case that we are safer today now that CO2 levels are higher, and ignores the positive impacts of medicine, food supply, agriculture technology, etc. Do you believe this is misleading? Shall we assume that continued CO2 increases will improve rather than diminish our capacity to produce food, manage disease, etc simply because that has been the pattern for the past century during which so many other changes also account for improvement in that regard? He is certainly an outlier in the scientific community in making such claims, and what worries me most is that he is convinced that all others are engaged in some wild conspiracy, although he offers no reason to explain why they would do so.
 
Last edited:
bullskin said:
The Real Climate Science link provided is managed by Tony Heller--an ex-Electrical Engineer, if I remember correctly.

Out of curiosity, what do you make of his charts? It seems that life expectancy and death by natural disaster have both decreased as CO2 level have risen over the past century, while crop production has improved. He appears to be making the case that we are safer today now that CO2 levels are higher, and ignores the positive impacts of medicine, food supply, agriculture technology, etc. Do you believe this is misleading? Shall we assume that continued CO2 increases will improve rather than diminish our capacity to produce food, manage disease, etc simply because that has been the pattern for the past century during which so many other changes also account for improvement in that regard? He is certainly an outlier in the scientific community in making such claims, and what worries me most is that he is convinced that all others are engaged in some wild conspiracy, although he offers no reason to explain why they would do so.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is somewhat misleading, although he points out that life thrived when C02 was 10 times as high as it is now. C02 is nothing to fear is his point. I know a marijuana grower who pumps CO2 into his greenhouse for a higher yield. And fossil fuels have saved untold numbers of lives. Cold used to kill more people than heat. Turn the heater on or the air conditioner and save lives, but don't fear CO2.
 
There is no doubt that CO2 benefits some species even as it harms others. Plants love it; animals love to eat plants, but it is not safe to assume that high CO2 levels must therefore benefit animals. As an example, of the five most significant mass extinctions, elevated CO2 is suspected as the cause of three. The Permian, for example ended with volcanic eruptions that released CO2 thought to be responsible for the extinction of 75% of terrestrial and 95% of marine animal species. When it comes to extinction, we humans (at least the wealthy ones) will find a way to adapt, but many creatures are not able to modify their own environment in such a way as to make it livable. The fact that we would have to further modify our environment (turn up the AC, heater) to survive says a lot.
 
"The fact that we would have to further modify our environment (turn up the AC, heater) to survive says a lot."

lmao.....that's funny.
 
Did you know that going from 320ppm (parts per million) of CO2 which it was in 1900, to 420ppm is equivalent to adding two more people to Madison Square Garden. It hardly seems deadly to me.
 
Had a guy bring up climate change this weekend at an open house. We had a random rain a few days prior and he blamed in on climate change. Weirdo!
 
eelgrass said:
Did you know that going from 320ppm (parts per million) of CO2 which it was in 1900, to 420ppm is equivalent to adding two more people to Madison Square Garden. It hardly seems deadly to me.
Click to expand...

I do not understand the Madison Square Garden analogy. The increase from 290 ppm in 1900 to 415 ppm today, percentage-wise, is over 40%. Imagine how we would feel if 40% more people applied for the next years tags. That is a significant increase, isn't it?
 
bullskin said:
I do not understand the Madison Square Garden analogy. The increase from 290 ppm in 1900 to 415 ppm today, percentage-wise, is over 40%. Imagine how we would feel if 40% more people applied for the next years tags. That is a significant increase, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Useful idiots all appear to be somewhat intelligent....and believe what they are told to believe......until they prove they are not
 
eelgrass said:
We're in a CO2 famine. 2:30 video

Click to expand...

Thank you. It is an interesting video, and it is not incorrect. Certainly, carbon dioxide levels have been much higher in times past than they are today. But it misses the point that it is the change in carbon dioxide level that results in extinction, not the level itself. Earth has a history of extinction--most of earth's current life forms are only recently evolved, while the vast majority of those that ever existed are long gone. But this (of course) doesn't mean that we should welcome another exitinction today. The most dramatic extinction events correlate to rapid changes in climate and ocean chemistry--often as a result of volcanic eruption and CO2 emission. If CO2 levels were to rise or fall slowly, no one would be concerned about climate change or extinction since species would have time to adapt. It is worth noting that mass extinction has similarly resulted from periods of rapid cooling as CO2 levels fall. The commonality is the speed at which these changes occur and the ability of life to respond.
 
Last edited:
Homer said:
Don't try arguing with the left eel......they are too smart
Click to expand...

Science is neither left, nor right. And neither do liberals hold a monopoly on intelligence--despite the anti-intellectual position assumed by some on the right who do not speak for all of us. Many conservatives (3/4 of Americans) agree with the growing consensus that climate change is real; that humans contribute to climate change, and that climate change will harm future generations. That alone doesn't make them right, but neither does it make them liberal; nor should you feel defensive or run to your safe place when confronted with their ideas.

The corollary to this point is that not every conservative will agree with you on every issue--and in this environment, the wise cultivate political allies rather than seek to divide themselves. One way to do that is to avoid feeling butt-hurt over every disagreement one has with others.
 
Have you ever asked a geologist or meteorologist, that was hell bent, that we would run out of fossil fuels and the glaciers in Glacier Park would all be gone, by the year 2,000, “what happened”?

They have no shame, they have no explanation, no remorse, there is no embarrassment.

They simply have contempt that you asked.

You couldn’t change their mind if you had the truth carved in tablets of stone. You can only mitigate around them and keep moving forward, like we did with the geologists and meteorologists from the 1970’s. Imagine where the world would be if we had allowed those so called scientists to rule the day in 1975.
 
Wiszard said:
Same as if we actually landed on the moon....never know for sure, DC.
Click to expand...
I hear we might be headed back Wiz…….. wonder if Old Glory is still gonna be there, to welcome us back? I watched Neil Armstrong plant it, somewhere, on Black and White TV, back in 1969.
 
2lumpy said:
Have you ever asked a geologist or meteorologist, that was hell bent, that we would run out of fossil fuels and the glaciers in Glacier Park would all be gone, by the year 2,000, “what happened”?

They have no shame, they have no explanation, no remorse, there is no embarrassment.

They simply have contempt that you asked.

You couldn’t change their mind if you had the truth carved in tablets of stone. You can only mitigate around them and keep moving forward, like we did with the geologists and meteorologists from the 1970’s. Imagine where the world would be if we had allowed those so called scientists to rule the day in 1975.
Click to expand...

For every overstated climate projection there is another that proved too low. In what aspect of our lives do we ever expect perfect vision? Which is worse, failing to predict the date that the ice melts or fuel runs out, or failing to predict these events entirely?
 
bullskin said:
Science is neither left, nor right. And neither do liberals hold a monopoly on intelligence--despite the anti-intellectual position assumed by some on the right who do not speak for all of us. Many conservatives (3/4 of Americans) agree with the growing consensus that climate change is real; that humans contribute to climate change, and that climate change will harm future generations. That alone doesn't make them right, but neither does it make them liberal; nor should you feel defensive or run to your safe place when confronted with their ideas.

The corollary to this point is that not every conservative will agree with you on every issue--and in this environment, the wise cultivate political allies rather than seek to divide themselves. One way to do that is to avoid feeling butt-hurt over every disagreement one has with others.
Click to expand...
Of course 75% of the conservatives believe that the climate changes. I’m shocked that 99% of them don’t. But 75% conservatives believe humans contribute climate change…….. ?

I’d like to know where that data set comes from.

Humans affect local environments, air, water, soil, temperature. Global climate…….. BS, total BS.
 
bullskin said:
For every overstated climate projection there is another that proved too low. In what aspect of our lives do we ever expect perfect vision? Which is worse, failing to predict the date that the ice melts or fuel runs out, or failing to predict these events entirely?
Click to expand...
When an imperfect vision starts to undermine and otherwise destroyer a civilization that I live and believe in, I’ll take the side against the heartfelt prediction…… every single time.
 
2lumpy said:
Of course 75% of the conservatives believe that the climate changes. I’m shocked that 99% of them don’t. But 75% conservatives believe humans contribute climate change…….. ?

I’d like to know where that data set comes from.

Humans affect local environments, air, water, soil, temperature. Global climate…….. BS, total BS.
Click to expand...

I wrote 75% of "Americans" believe that humans contribute.
 
2lumpy said:
When an imperfect vision starts to undermine and otherwise destroyer a civilization that I live and believe in, I’ll take the side against the heartfelt prediction…… every single time.
Click to expand...
Refusing to act because you are uncertain about the date that the fuel runs out does not mean that it won't still run out. Your civilization will change whether or not you agree.

In any event, I am not here to advocate for action of any sort-that is a political decision that you will make for yourself. I am simply here to clarify the science where the facts may be misconstrued.
 
bullskin said:
Refusing to act because you are uncertain about the date that the fuel runs out does not mean that it won't still run out. Your civilization will change with or without your interest.

In any event, I am not here to advocate for action of any sort-that is a political decision that you will make for yourself. I am simply here to clarify the science where the facts may be misconstrued.
Click to expand...
Have you ever noticed how, “facts” almost always change.

Hell, bullskin, there could come a time when we’ll learn we’ve been wrong about gravity, for the last 300 some years.

Also, you were speaking of conservatives, then added 75% Americans in parentheses. My mistake, I assumed you meant American conservatives, so you slipped that one by me, but you should know I’m dyslexic….. so that will happen on a regular bases. It’s usually a mortal sin to combine conservatives with the morally superior liberals, so it threw me off.
 
2lumpy said:
Have you ever noticed how, “facts” almost always change.

Hell, bullskin, there could come a time when we’ll learn we’ve been wrong about gravity, for the last 300 some years.

Also, you were speaking of conservatives, then added 75% Americans in parentheses. My mistake, I assumed you meant American conservatives, so you slipped that one by me, but you should know I’m dyslexic….. so that will happen on a regular bases. It’s usually a mortal sin to combine conservatives with the morally superior liberals, so it threw me off.
Click to expand...

Although the facts themselves do not change, our interpretations certainly do as we accumulate more and better information. If not Einstein, then who would have predicted gravitational waves? And we still don't understand the expansion of the universe, so you are undoubtedly correct about that.

Nevertheless, we all make hundreds of decisions every day based on imperfect information. All the more reason to recognize and eliminate inaccurate or misleading information where it persists.

I consider myself conservative, but (as a side-note) you got my attention with your comment regarding the moral superiority of liberals v. conservatives. If you had asked me, I would have said that conservatives identify as morally superior more so than liberals. Do you disagree? Or do they simply disagree over which behaviors are "moral"?
 
bullskin said:
Although the facts themselves do not change, our interpretations certainly do as we accumulate more and better information. If not Einstein, then who would have predicted gravitational waves? And we still don't understand the expansion of the universe, so you are undoubtedly correct about that.

Nevertheless, we all make hundreds of decisions every day based on imperfect information. All the more reason to recognize and eliminate inaccurate or misleading information where it persists.

I consider myself conservative, but (as a side-note) you got my attention with your comment regarding the moral superiority of liberals v. conservatives. If you had asked me, I would have said that conservatives identify as morally superior more so than liberals. Do you disagree? Or do they simply disagree over which behaviors are "moral"?
Click to expand...
My own fault cuz I started with the philosophical words but I don’t have time to chase your or my own tail around a morality tree endlessly.

I’ll just finish by saying I don’t believe, at this point in time, humans are currently causing the our climate to change. A war with Russia or China could possibly change that however.

I’m a lowly disciple of eelgrass……. so I’ll move on, and yield the floor back him.
 
coloradoman said:
Another mellow informative thread that’s been going on for over 8 months shot to sh!t
?
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. All this arguing about man made climate change and mass extinction when we already missed it.

On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press squeezed decimation into a tight, 11-year window, with an ominous article, “Rising Seas Could Obliterate Nations,” containing a jaw-dropping opener: “A senior UN environmental official (Noel Brown) says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”
 
eelgrass said:
I couldn't agree more. All this arguing about man made climate change and mass extinction when we already missed it.

On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press squeezed decimation into a tight, 11-year window, with an ominous article, “Rising Seas Could Obliterate Nations,” containing a jaw-dropping opener: “A senior UN environmental official (Noel Brown) says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”
Click to expand...
 
I was up hunting in northeastern California the past couple of days and it was 11 degrees in camp yesterday morning.
 
Last 4 morning have been around 10 in the am and highs around 38 here in Central Oregon.....temps that make coyotes eager to come into the calls!
 
50 degrees here at 9pm. The first house I bought had the plumbing in the slab foundation. "How come I hear water running and the concrete in the bathroom is warm?" "Oh, Sh!t"
 
2lumpy said:
If you have exposed pipes, it’s always good to have them handy like that…….
Click to expand...
Yes, and it’s way easier to find the leak when the sheetrock gets soaked and the ceiling crashes in. Saves ALOT of $$$ on them high-dollar plumbers when they don’t have to do the demo.
 
Been running about 10 degrees above normal highs and lows so far this winter in Bozangeles.
But I here its not going to last 10 day shows C*** sock weather late next week
 
We've had perty Much the same weather For A Few Weeks Now!

No Snow Other Than A Skiff A Couple Weeks ago!

Lows 6-10 Above!

Highs 28-34 Above!

I'm Liking The Global Warming!
 

Similar threads

gr8fuldoug
Athlon Winners Chosen - Enter to Win a Pulsar Thermal
Replies
0
Views
104
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
J
The Wake-up Call….
Replies
26
Views
3k
cgmoonsky
cgmoonsky

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

864EB8E4-B197-4DE3-B6AD-18A709484140.jpeg
IMG_9543.jpg
5A6DA7EB-9B3C-456E-8F3E-F462C91B34F8.jpeg
8B7580CE-D1FC-47C7-B3F6-21EC8D85AC99.jpeg
05669DF3-061C-4234-BE6F-5B5147A5C435.jpeg
bens buck 2.JPG
20191021_130104.jpg
580F728B-F137-4E4C-8BD5-B81245421190.jpeg
bens buck 6.jpg
906DE8C5-64D8-4788-BE5B-96E1C232FB37.jpeg
56C6F1C4-8F2C-4EE4-8669-EDD442E20A17.png
Screenshot_20200906-102843_Gallery.jpg
Back
Top Bottom