Interesting site on Climate Change and Global Warming.

[Ilvane]

I was looking at weather.com this morning and saw this great site on Climate Change, and thought I'd share. It's pretty interesting, and a bit scientific too.

I thought it might start an interesting discussion.

Angela

http://climate.weather.com/?from=hp_whatson

[Stanley Burrell]

Frank Herbert would be proud!

I totally agree on the ill-equiping of third world nations their needed irrigation supplies as being retardedly problematic.

Nonetheless, American PR has, does and would get that much more of a tsunami-sized boost if acting in the moment as opposed to preemptively. And I doubt that'll change much.

[Parkbandit]

I was looking at weather.com this morning and saw this great site on Climate Change, and thought I'd share. It's pretty interesting, and a bit scientific too.

I thought it might start an interesting discussion.

Angela

http://climate.weather.com/?from=hp_whatson

And by 'a bit scientific' you mean drawing conclusions based upon loose 'facts' to come to a definate conclusion that if you do not agree with their findings.. you should be stripped of your credibility ala Dr. Heidi Cullen.

Yea.


Here's some real facts for you:

Man-made carbon dioxide emissions are roughly 5 percent of the total; the rest are from natural sources such as volcanoes, dying vegetation and animals.

Annually, volcanoes alone produce more carbon dioxide than all of mankind's activities.

Oceans are responsible for most greenhouse gases.

Contrary to environmentalists' claims, the higher the Earth's temperature, the higher the carbon dioxide levels. In other words, carbon dioxide levels are a product of climate change.

Many scientists argue that the greatest influence on the Earth's temperature is our sun's sunspot activity.

[Stanley Burrell]

And by 'a bit scientific' you mean drawing conclusions based upon loose 'facts' to come to a definate conclusion that if you do not agree with their findings.. you should be stripped of your credibility ala Dr. Heidi Cullen.

Yea.


Here's some real facts for you:

Man-made carbon dioxide emissions are roughly 5 percent of the total; the rest are from natural sources such as volcanoes, dying vegetation and animals.

Annually, volcanoes alone produce more carbon dioxide than all of mankind's activities.

Oceans are responsible for most greenhouse gases.

Contrary to environmentalists' claims, the higher the Earth's temperature, the higher the carbon dioxide levels. In other words, carbon dioxide levels are a product of climate change.

Many scientists argue that the greatest influence on the Earth's temperature is our sun's sunspot activity.

I'm pretty sure the banner Angela linked to had anything and everything to do with water being a commodity, not air emissions (directly.)

[Parkbandit]

I'm pretty sure the banner Angela linked to had anything and everything to do with water being a commodity, not air emissions (directly.)


I'm pretty sure you are wrong.. as usual.

[Stanley Burrell]

I'm pretty sure you are wrong.. as usual.

The whole world is wrong according to you, so no sweat off my nuts.

Anyway:


Top ex-military leaders call global warming major security risk
By SETH BORENSTEIN AP Science WriterSunday, April 15, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) — Global warming poses a "serious threat to America's national security" with terrorism worsening and the U.S. will likely be dragged into fights over water and other shortages, top retired military leaders warn in a new report.

Joining calls already made by scientists and environmental activists, the retired U.S. military leaders, including the former Army chief of staff and President George W. Bush's former chief Middle East peace negotiator, called on the U.S. government to make major cuts in emissions of gases that cause global warming.

The report warned that in the next 30 to 40 years there will be wars over water, increased hunger instability from worsening disease and rising sea levels and global warming-induced refugees. "The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide and the growth of terrorism," the 35-page report predicted.

"Climate change exacerbates already unstable situations," former U.S. Army chief of staff Gordon Sullivan told Associated Press Radio. "Everybody needs to start paying attention to what's going on. I don't think this is a particularly hard sell in the Pentagon. ... We're paying attention to what those security implications are."

Gen. Anthony "Tony" Zinni, Bush's former Middle East envoy, said in the report: "It's not hard to make the connection between climate change and instability, or climate change and terrorism."

The report was issued by the Alexandria, Virginia-based, national security think-tank The CNA Corporation and was written by six retired admirals and five retired generals. They warned of a future of rampant disease, water shortages and flooding that will make already dicey areas — such as the Middle East, Asia and Africa — even worse.

"Weakened and failing governments, with an already thin margin for survival, foster the conditions for internal conflicts, extremism and movement toward increased authoritarianism and radical ideologies," the report said. "The U.S. will be drawn more frequently into these situations."

In a veiled reference to Bush's refusal to join an international treaty to cut greenhouse gas emissions, the report said the U.S. government "must become a more constructive partner" with other nations to fight global warming and cope with its consequences.

The Bush administration has declined mandatory emission cuts in favor of voluntary methods. Other nations have committed to required reductions that kick in within a few years.

"We will pay for this one way or another," wrote Zinni, former commander of U.S. Central Command. "We will pay to reduce greenhouse gas emissions today, and we'll have to take an economic hit of some kind. Or we will pay the price later in military terms. And that will involve human lives. There will be a human toll."

Top climate scientists said the report makes sense and increased national security risk is a legitimate global warming side-effect.

The report is "pretty impressive," but may be too alarmist because it may take longer than 30 years for some of these things to happen, said Stanford scientist Terry Root, a co-author of this month's international scientific report on the effects of global warming on life on Earth.

But the instability will happen sometime, Root agreed.

"We're going to have a war over water," Root said. "There's just not going to be enough water around for us to have for us to need to live with and to provide for the natural environment."

University of Victoria climate scientist Andrew Weaver said the military officers were smart to highlight the issue of refugees who flee unstable areas because of global warming.

"There will be tens of millions of people migrating, where are we going to put them?" Weaver said.

Weaver said that over the past years, scientists, who by nature are cautious, have been attacked by conservative activists when warning about climate change. This shows that it's not a liberal-conservative issue, Weaver said.

My:


Frank Herbert would be proud!

I totally agree on the ill-equiping of third world nations their needed irrigation supplies as being retardedly problematic.

Nonetheless, American PR has, does and would get that much more of a tsunami-sized boost if acting in the moment as opposed to preemptively. And I doubt that'll change much.

Was based on the "We're going to have a war over water" fine print above, along with the rest of the article and its conclusion -- I'm guessing that if you had even bothered to read the article you still probably wouldn't have known that... That, or you can go find another one your dying eyesight skimmed over all too quickly.

I guess I was "wrong" in thinking that by somehow stooping to your self-asserted level, that I could somehow get some beta waves going. But hell, it's Monday.

[Keller]

I'm pretty sure PB cut/pasted his "facts" from a forwarded e-mail citing, "A world renowned scientist."

[Parkbandit]

I'm pretty sure PB cut/pasted his "facts" from a forwarded e-mail citing, "A world renowned scientist."

Better source than your moveon.globalwarminghysteria.org site

Maybe you should take a break from this topic.. as you seem to get upset whenever anyone provides you facts that contradict the environmentalist agenda.

[Methais]

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/DoyleHargraves/l_67a513bd523edece6f7d94be14331536.jpg

[Ilvane]

I never thought the weather channel was move on or something along that line.

They are the weather channel.

Am I missing something here?

Angela

[TheEschaton]

You forgot, Ilvane: The weather channel is part of the liberal media-ocracy.

-TheE-

[Gan]

From a marketing standpoint, the weather channel's inclusion of a new global warming segment makes sense.

[Gan]

I seem to remember where meteorologists were getting their credentials yanked if they publically disagreed with the 'global warming' theory...


On a side note, found an interesting petition site speaking against the global warming issue.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

[Parkbandit]

You forgot, Ilvane: The weather channel is part of the liberal media-ocracy.

-TheE-

When you have the chick that Ilvane linked saying shit like "If you don't agree with the global warming, you should have your credintials taken from you".. then I pretty much put her in with the rest of the alarmist hippy environmentalists who, instead of talking about saving energy.. create a crisis to force people to take action.

[sst]

who the fuck cares about global warming, we are in a war that may end the world as it is, maybe you should focus your time and money on that instead of what might happen 1000 years from now.

[Back]

who the fuck cares about global warming, we are in a war that may end the world as it is, maybe you should focus your time and money on that instead of what might happen 1000 years from now.

Some of us are.

Its a battle of ideologies.

[Keller]

Better source than your moveon.globalwarminghysteria.org site

Maybe you should take a break from this topic.. as you seem to get upset whenever anyone provides you facts that contradict the environmentalist agenda.

I don't present "facts."

I KNOW that I DON'T know enough to make my own opinion. I know that many reputable scientists can't agree.

From the very beginning I've stated that it is certain the Earth will heat. At the very least the sun will grow in the next few billion years. I think, based on the earth's history, we might see an ice age before that. I don't give two fucks what causes it except inasmuchas I want to prevent it.

From the very beginning I've said that the issue is how do we control climate change, whatever the cause. Because the key to our eventual survival (assuming to nuclear war, ebola, etc) is to create a global thermostat.

I don't have an environmentalist agenda. I have a "quit whinning" agenda. And that's all you seem to do in any thread on global warming, whine.

PS: I was correct that you cut/paste those "facts" from a mass e-mail, right?

[Latrinsorm]

I think, based on the earth's history, we might see an ice age before that. I don't give two fucks what causes it except inasmuchas I want to prevent it.From pole to gleaming pole!

[Parkbandit]

PS: I was correct that you cut/paste those "facts" from a mass e-mail, right?


You are incorrect... but you already knew this.

[Keller]

You are incorrect... but you already knew this.

Then where did you cut/paste them from?

[Parkbandit]

Then where did you cut/paste them from?

It's called the internet. Try it sometime. There is PLENTY of compelling evidence right on the link Ganalon provided... while I realize it is the type of evidence that blows huge holes in your Saint Gore's theory... you might want to take a gander.

[Parkbandit]

I think, based on the earth's history, we might see an ice age before that. I don't give two fucks what causes it except inasmuchas I want to prevent it.


There is the clincher right there.

You believe that Man is causing global warming..

Then you believe that we will see an ice age.. which is in direct conflict with the global warming theory.

Then you believe we can somehow prevent the Ice age that will eventually hit the earth as it has done in the past...

You my friend.. are confused as all hell.

[Keller]

There is the clincher right there.

You believe that Man is causing global warming..

Then you believe that we will see an ice age.. which is in direct conflict with the global warming theory.

Then you believe we can somehow prevent the Ice age that will eventually hit the earth as it has done in the past...

You my friend.. are confused as all hell.

Lrn2Read. I never said man causes global warming. In fact, if you look at the data which I presented to Lassiter/Rathian you will see I'm of the persuasion that climate change is a natural phenomenon. I think you're confused because I constantly call you out for whinning about environmentalists.

And yes, there are many different proposed temperature controls. Each time you bring up global warming I always resort back to bringing up the idea of geo-engineering in hopes that we can shift the discussion to a productive topic instead of all blowing hot-air at each other in futile attempts to "prove" something or "disprove" something which people MUCH more educated than us have failed to "prove/disprove."

[Keller]

It's called the internet. Try it sometime. There is PLENTY of compelling evidence right on the link Ganalon provided... while I realize it is the type of evidence that blows huge holes in your Saint Gore's theory... you might want to take a gander.

I think you honestly believe Gore said he invented the internet. I also think you honestly believe Gore released An Inconvenient Truth with a profit motive.

I also think you're delusional when it comes to global warming and will believe almost anything Rush brainwashes you to believe.

[Parkbandit]

I think you honestly believe Gore said he invented the internet. I also think you honestly believe Gore released An Inconvenient Truth with a profit motive.

I also think you're delusional when it comes to global warming and will believe almost anything Rush brainwashes you to believe.


I found your problem:


I think

That's not thinking.. that's reverse projection and assuming... something you've done far too much.

[Gan]

who the fuck cares about global warming, we are in a war that may end the world as it is, maybe you should focus your time and money on that instead of what might happen 1000 years from now.


Nuclear winter - the quick cure for global warming...

[xtc]

I seem to remember where meteorologists were getting their credentials yanked if they publically disagreed with the 'global warming' theory...


On a side note, found an interesting petition site speaking against the global warming issue.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

Yes the petition is being held by Frederick Seitz who use to work for big tobacco until he was let go for being senile in 1989. That is the President of R.J. Reynolds speaking, not me.

Seitz is linked to big oil, he is just another paid shill. Also Seitz was a Director of a company that operated coal fired plants.

Seitz is on the board of The Marshall Institute which receives most of its funding from Exxon.

http://stopexxon.unfortu.net/index.php?mapid=95

[Bartlett]

The environment haters who claim global warming is not man's fault are claiming that the fact that mars has risen by about 1 degree since 1970 is evidence that there are other factors involved. As a devout champion of the undeniable fact that humans are responsible for global warming, I would like to point out the obvious evidence that the first successful landing of a space probe (ie. human interference) was in 1971.

[Parkbandit]

The environment haters who claim global warming is not man's fault are claiming that the fact that mars has risen by about 1 degree since 1970 is evidence that there are other factors involved. As a devout champion of the undeniable fact that humans are responsible for global warming, I would like to point out the obvious evidence that the first successful landing of a space probe (ie. human interference) was in 1971.


SON OF A BITCH! SO MAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR GLOBALS WARMINGS NOW!?

Al Gore is working on his new mockumentary... to save Venus.

[Gan]

Yes the petition is being held by Frederick Seitz who use to work for big tobacco until he was let go for being senile in 1989. That is the President of R.J. Reynolds speaking, not me.

Seitz is linked to big oil, he is just another paid shill. Also Seitz was a Director of a company that operated coal fired plants.

Seitz is on the board of The Marshall Institute which receives most of its funding from Exxon.

http://stopexxon.unfortu.net/index.php?mapid=95

ROFL at your greenpeace reference guide to Seitz.

Here's a more accurate description of Seitz, with cites.
__________________________________________________ ___

Frederick Seitz (born July 4 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_4), 1911 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1911)) is an American (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) scientist. Seitz studied under Eugene Wigner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Wigner) at Princeton University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princeton_University), graduating in 1934 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1934). They invented the Wigner-Seitz unit cell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner-Seitz_unit_cell), which is an important concept in solid state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_state_physics) physics. In 1940, he published a prominent physics textbook, The Modern Theory of Solids.

Seitz has commented on the role of curiosity in the process of scientific discovery:
"Over a long time, things that people learn purely out of curiosity can have a revolutionary effect on human affairs." [1] (http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=21) From 1949-1968 he served as a professor of physics at the University of Illinois. The Frederick Seitz Materials Research Laboratory at the university is named for him.

He served as the president of the National Academy of Sciences (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Academy_of_Sciences) from 1962 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962) until 1969 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1969). From 1968 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968) through 1978 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978), he was president of Rockefeller University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_University).

Shortly before his retirement from Rockefeller University in 1979 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979), Seitz began working as a paid permanent consultant for the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.J._Reynolds_Tobacco_Company), advising their research program.

By 1989 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989), the CEO of R.J. Reynolds, William Hobbs, concluded that "Dr. Seitz is quite elderly and not sufficiently rational to offer advice." [2] (http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2023266534.html?pattern=fred%5Ba-z%5D%2A%5CW%2Bseitz%5Ba-z%5D%2A&#p1) However, in 1994 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994), Seitz authored a report published by the George C. Marshall Institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_C._Marshall_Institute), of which he was a founder and chairman of the board, entitled "Global warming and ozone hole controversies. A challenge to scientific judgment." In a broader discussion of environmental toxins, he concluded "there is no good scientific evidence that passive inhalation is truly dangerous under normal circumstances." [3] (http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/10/4/375)

Seitz continues to question whether global warming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming) is anthropogenic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropogenic) [4] (http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=812). He supports the position of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine) (OISM) on global warming and in an open letter invited scientists to sign the OISM's global warming petition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition). Seitz also signed the 1995 Leipzig Declaration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leipzig_Declaration).

Seitz is also critical of the view that CFCs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFCs) are damaging to the ozone layer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_layer) [5] (http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=21).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Seitz

[Warriorbird]

Given the business school scientists you reference, Gan, you're not exactly winning big.

[Nieninque]

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/3154/globalwarmingme9.jpg

[Gan]

Given the business school scientists you reference, Gan, you're not exactly winning big.


Winning is not my goal. Being informed and learning is. ;)

[Parkbandit]

There is a Glenn Beck program on right now on CNN Headline News regarding the other side of the global warming debate. We've all heard (until we're blue in the face) about the 'real' dangers of man's role in global warming. This is the other side of the debate.

7pm, 9pm and 12pm Eastern time.

[Warriorbird]

Right, right, Parkbandit. Sort of like "intelligent design" being the "other side of the debate."

;)

[Gan]

And in other news... China says that due to their strict population control law limiting Chinese family's to only 1 child contributes significantly to minimizing their nation's carbon footprint...


:lol:

[Parkbandit]

Right, right, Parkbandit. Sort of like "intelligent design" being the "other side of the debate."

;)


Remain ignorant. You entertain me much more this way.

[Warriorbird]

I think that's the main reason most of us post in politics. Our own entertainment.

[Parkbandit]

I think that's the main reason most of us post in politics. Our own entertainment.


/Guilty as charged

If it weren't for the crazy ass libs on these boards.. I would have left a long time ago.

[Back]

rofl @ Glen Beck presenting misinformation as “news.” CNN should be ashamed. In fact, I watch it less now.

[Back]

/Guilty as charged

If it weren't for the crazy ass libs on these boards.. I would have left a long time ago.

/guilty your honor.

If it weren’t for people presenting wild hyperbole as fact I would not be here.

[Gan]

/guilty your honor.

If it weren’t for people presenting wild hyperbole as fact I would not be here.


Like you dont?

:lol:

[Back]

I think that's the main reason most of us post in politics. Our own entertainment.


Like you dont?

:lol:

You just don’t get it and I am afraid you never will. Not with your head wrapped in a tiny little ball of self indulgence anyway.

[Gan]

You just don’t get it and I am afraid you never will. Not with your head wrapped in a tiny little ball of self indulgence anyway.

Thats way better than having my head wrapped in a tinly little ball of hemp. In moments of clarity I can make my 'self indulgence' disappear'; however, you on the other hand have trouble just gaining moments of clarity much less coming out from underneath the 'cloud'.

[Parkbandit]

You just don’t get it and I am afraid you never will. Not with your head wrapped in a tiny little ball of self indulgence anyway.


Exactly.

Ganalon simply won't buy into your notion that hyperbole only comes from the conservative side and anything presented from the liberal side should be considered fact, no matter the source.

Ganalon, u r dumb.

[Parkbandit]

rofl @ Glen Beck presenting misinformation as “news.” CNN should be ashamed. In fact, I watch it less now.

Is it only misinformation because you don't agree with it? I'm not saying he is a biased source, clearly he's not.. but he brings forth some pretty good arguments.. unless you are a closed minded simpleton.

Guess that leaves you out in the cold as usual Backlash. Er, I mean leaves you out in the heat now. It would have been the cold, back in the 70's when your side was screaming 'WE'RE ALL DOOOOOOMED!" in the face of the next ice age.