What Do We Think About Climate Change

[wardd]

wouldnt they be better keeping the status quo to remain in power?

its already there making money why take a chance on an unknown replacement

i can cite hundreds of papers too whether the authors want me to or not to make a point that they may disagree with

as i've said, scientist don't agree with other scientists, they agree with the science

just out of curiosity jimbo whats's your take on evolution?

There are groups trying to influence world events - just not as powerful as Jimbo seems to believe. Your attack has no relevance, Mr. Ad Hominum.
Just sat down and saw a bit of a show called Ecopolis. In it, Nobel prize-winner Daniel Kannan investigates how to save the world. The first thing I heard was that "by 2050, we're going to be driving cars with algae in the tank, or we'll be walking." Never mind the statement, itself, but concentrate on the notion that we are running out of oil. Estimates 20 years ago were that we would be out next year... why not just go ahead and let us run out? You'll then have what you want, will you not? Use the last of the fossil fuels then green it will be!

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by mark775

There are groups trying to influence world events - just not as powerful as Jimbo seems to believe. Your attack has no relevance, Mr. Ad Hominum.
Just sat down and saw a bit of a show called Ecopolis. In it, Nobel prize-winner Daniel Kannan investigates how to save the world. The first thing I heard was that "by 2050, we're going to be driving cars with algae in the tank, or we'll be walking." Never mind the statement, itself, but concentrate on the notion that we are running out of oil. Estimates 20 years ago were that we would be out next year... why not just go ahead and let us run out? You'll then have what you want, will you not? Use the last of the fossil fuels then green it will be!

Hardly an attack; just a simple observation. It's hard to misinterpret "A small group of unelected people around the world run the whole show, and this is (the latest iteration of) their vision." The only question left is what label Jimbo pins on them.

Regarding your comments on energy, you're right about predictions of running out of oil being nothing new. I once saw a reprint of a tire ad from somewhere around WWI, that predicted the world would run out of oil shortly (I forget the predicted date). The point of the ad was that if everyone switched to the advertiser's pneumatic tires, the better mileage would stretch the available oil supply by several years.

But of course we're never going to run out of fossil fuels, as such. What'll happen is that what's left will simply keep getting harder to find and more expensive to produce, until we turn to alternatives out of sheer necessity. It would be nice if we had some alternatives in place before we get to that point.....

[masalai]

with reference to posts #3806 and thereabouts... Nevertheless the evidence strongly indicates, certain organisations seek POWER, absofrikinlootly - absolute power - and the best/easiest way to be powerful, is to control money and money supply...

Now before you dismiss this as another "masalai-wank"?, do yourself the courtesy of having a bit of a think, and do some digging around some of the not so rabid websites that you seem all to eager to dismiss... There are far too many people driven by control and domination, to be able to, out of hand dismiss this postulation...

[Jimbo1490]

Originally Posted by troy2000

Hardly an attack; just a simple observation. It's hard to misinterpret "A small group of unelected people around the world run the whole show, and this is (the latest iteration of) their vision." The only question left is what label Jimbo pins on them.

Regarding your comments on energy, you're right about predictions of running out of oil being nothing new. I once saw a reprint of a tire ad from somewhere around WWI, that predicted the world would run out of oil shortly (I forget the predicted date). The point of the ad was that if everyone switched to the advertiser's pneumatic tires, the better mileage would stretch the available oil supply by several years.

But of course we're never going to run out of fossil fuels, as such. What'll happen is that what's left will simply keep getting harder to find and more expensive to produce, until we turn to alternatives out of sheer necessity. It would be nice if we had some alternatives in place before we get to that point.....

I know it's a highly contested point, but we don't have unequivocal evidence that fossil fuels came from fossilized biomass at all. The first problem is location. Nobody has come up with a plausible mechanism that put all this goop, which is lighter than water, so far below the water table. Secondly and more importantly, the quantity of oil already harvested coupled with known reserves to too great to be attributable to biomass. And the numbers are not even close; we've harvested ~19 cubic miles(do not quote; I'm going from memory here!) of oil so far and they think the total reserves are something like 100 cubic miles. The thing is even the 19 cubic miles is more biomass than ever lived on earth!

That it was from fossils was only ever a guess, nothing more. They guessed this way partly because it was once believed that only living things could 'fix' carbon (I never knew it was broken ), but that belief has been shaken by recent discoveries. But how could life have evolved without abiotic fixed carbon, anyway?

Jimbo

[Guillermo]

It is sad seeing this thread has recently come back again into disqualifications and personal attacks, bringing nothing useful to it. I think it's important to avoid such attitudes and just keep on posting and debating relevant information on the subject.

Proponents of the AGW say we are experiencing historically totally anomalous temperatures making ice melting etc, particularly in Greenland. Would any of such proponents or defendants please comment this graph taken from NOAA ice core data from Greenland?



There are more interesting graphics like this one here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/0...ice-core-data/

Cheers.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Jimbo1490

I know it's a highly contested point, but we don't have unequivocal evidence that fossil fuels came from fossilized biomass at all. The first problem is location. Nobody has come up with a plausible mechanism that put all this goop, which is lighter than water, so far below the water table. Secondly and more importantly, the quantity of oil already harvested coupled with known reserves to too great to be attributable to biomass. And the numbers are not even close; we've harvested ~19 cubic miles(do not quote; I'm going from memory here!) of oil so far and they think the total reserves are something like 100 cubic miles. The thing is even the 19 cubic miles is more biomass than ever lived on earth!

That it was from fossils was only ever a guess, nothing more. They guessed this way partly because it was once believed that only living things could 'fix' carbon (I never knew it was broken ), but that belief has been shaken by recent discoveries. But how could life have evolved without abiotic fixed carbon, anyway?

Jimbo

How did the oil, gas and coal get below the water table? The same way the strata it's found in got there....and the same way fish fossils wind up on top of mountains: normal geological processes and time.

A competent geologist in the oil fields can tell whether a new well is likely to find oil, how close it is to hitting it, and what type it's likely to find, by looking at the microfossils being brought up. Conodonts, for example, are very useful:

This information, combined with thermal maturity studies, make conodonts a valuable exploration tool for oil and gas in basins around the world. The conodonts change colour after burial because of heating effects deep beneath the Earth’s surface. A similar process alters other organic matter into oil and gas and therefore the colour alteration index of conodonts can predict what type of hydrocarbon may be discovered.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/news/utoday/july14-09/conodont

I would say oil deposits are so closely associated with marine microfossils that there's really little doubt they have an organic basis, rather than forming from a process deep in the Earth, as some people believe. But it's an interesting subject to speculate on, and it would be nice to find out oil has an abiotic (non-living) origin.

Guillermo, It's no secret that I'm not literate on this topic. What do the axes represent?
Jimbo, any theories on what the source of oil may be then? I just assumed since I've been around coal quite a bit (I live in Alaska) and I have seen plenty of coal in stages that include having plant matter in it, and that coal and oil are similar(?), and that I grew up being told oil was dead dinos...
By the way, I think a large part of crude sinks like a rock but not all, obviously. I have never watched it sink but with the Exxon Valdez in '89, a vast majority of the cargo disappeared.

"...it would be nice to find out oil has an abiotic (non-living) origin." - it would. Then everybody would say "We better git rid of that **** before we are overwhelmed with new oil!"

Duh. C.temperature and date.

[Marco1]

Originally Posted by masdespacio

So you are back, what was your earlier (how many?) nick(s)? Since you know my name, you are a returner. Came for more?

Just stick to the theme, if you can. Which will be a challenge for you because you have been posting a lot of nonsense so far.

If your main problem is my political views, tough. Your "capitalism" is just a nazist ********. Face it and live with it. If you can't, get out of the engine room.

Bugger, now I'll have to explain what is the engine room...

Just try to keep your personal opinion up your arse and avoid personal confrontation. I am only too happy to accomodate you and respond appropriately. And there's a reason why I am still around with the same nick since 2005, while ******** posters come and go.

And read my posts before making comments as above. I do not believe in CO2 crap. That is what people on the right wing side of the politics do.

You know them. The same bunch of failed capitalists who ****** up usanian economy beyond repair. Bunch of stupid and retarded liars and criminals hiding under all sorts of flags and colours borrowed from others.

Talk about paranoia. All I have changed is my avatar, not my log on or name.
You don't like Asterix? You prefer the photo of Edgar Allan Poe?
Usanian economy? where is that?
of course I know your name, you singed some of you post Diego so I made the mental note (and conceded hasty assumption) that such might just be your name.
When you ask if I came for more, what do you mean? I never left, had some lively chat with some of the boys here. I noticed that the insults and gutter language had diminished lately...have you been on holidays?

Oh well, back to the gutter.

[Marco1]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/0...ice-core-data/

Hi Troy, have a look at the link posted by Guillermo, it makes for good reading. Very clever how the graphs when taken in smaller portions can tell a completely different story. I think I'll keep on gathering firewood just in case.

[wardd]

Originally Posted by mark775

ward, what is interesting about 775, if I may inquire?

775 falls in between 774 and 776 and as for me i don't think thats a coincidence

...The most inane stuff... I tried to sign on as "Mark" and could not (too short a name, already taken - I don't remember). The first number that popped into my head was my boat's official number. 775 is the last three digits thereof.

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by mark775

Duh. C.temperature and date.

Yeap!
Any comment?

Cheers.