ocean conditions are changing due to Rapid Global Climate Shift

Forbes -- A Conservative, Small-Government Strategy For Fighting Climate Change

see also Wall Street Journal -- Should There Be a Price on Carbon?

 

pictures of bicycles is irrelvant, most of my school campuses looked like that. I have been to a number of countries, and I have rode many thousands of miles on a bicycle for recreation. I have no illusions that I am not polluting when I ride my bike.

 

the thing about CO2 drives climate that fails as a theory, is diminishing returns.
There is only so much heat radiation in the frequency captured by co2, and its already enough co2 to capture all the sun radiates on earth. more co2 won't capture more rays than the sun produces. there has been NO substantial warming last 15 years and that's why global warming became climate change.
easier to predict accurately "Anything that happens is the fault of manmade co2!" milarky.

 

Apparently you don't understand the greenhouse effect, which is the mechanism driving AGW... that would explain why you don't believe it's happening.

CO2 doesn't capture heat from the sun's rays. It's mostly transparent to high frequencies, like the rest of the atmosphere. Instead the radiant energy comes on through and warms the Earth, and the Earth in turn radiates some of the energy back as thermal energy.

That lower-frequency thermal energy is the energy that CO2 and other greenhouse gases capture. And believe me: they don't come even close to catching 100% of it. I don't know where you ran into that claim, but it's a bogus one.

Here's a concise explanation that does a better job than I did, I think:

 

Why don't you quit telling us we don't understand. Stop being so smarmy and condescending.

 

Why don't you wait until I say it to you, before you complain? I doubt I ever will, because I realize you don't want to understand.....

What Yobarnacle said was completely wrong. If he understood it was the secondary radiation from the Earth instead of the primary radiation from the sun that CO2 works on, he wouldn't say there's some sort of saturation limit to capturing energy from the Sun's rays, much less that we've reached it and more CO2 will have no effect.

If someone tries to convince me with a bogus argument, I'm going to tell him it's bogus -- and why. If you think that's being smarmy and condescending of me, so be it.

 

troy2000 and hoytedow is time to get the dueling pistols out boys. hehehehe

 

Nahh... Hoyt and I have been beating up on each other for a long time. We're used to it.

Besides, last time I checked he had a dinghy cradle to finish, and I wouldn't want to interrupt that.

 

Any argument you can't or won't agree with you dismiss as bogus even though your own arguments are specious, Old Pal. CO2 is not the problem. Thieves of Liberty are.

 

As usual, you're confusing science with politics. And c'mon: are you actually going to try telling me Yobarnacle's argument wasn't bogus?

When I dismiss an argument as bogus, I explain why it's bogus. I don't just do the 'is too,' 'is not' bit....

And as I've explained before, when I got into these climate threads I knew little about the subject. But I was immediately struck by the fact that the arguments against AGW were generally either irrational, political instead of scientific, or both. And the more I looked into it, the more evident that became.

How's it feel to know you're one of the folks who helped shape my opinions on the subject?

 

The Rain Tax.

I was just reading an article on a " Rain Tax" being enacted to protect and clean up the Chesapeake Bay.

Clever. Good to see that people who cause the problem, pay for the solution.

Id expect more and more of these Polluter pays solutions as the climate heats up.

 

And you seriously think that this is a good idea?!?!?! It's tree hugers like you that will allow all our freedoms to be taken away inch by inch. Wake up to yourself. A tax on rain?!?!?! It's the local councils fault for poor management of the municipal systems not the residents. You are mistaken if you believe governments are doing this to look after the environment, if that were the case we would be driving electric cars the last 10 years. Watch the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car?", they don't give a crap about the environment. Also research why solar panels are so expensive, TAX on raw materials.....They don't want you having things for free, and it's the free things that don't pollute. Nikola Tesla ( the father of electricity as we know it ) wanted all of us to have wireless power transmition, even free power. But the powers that be figured out they can measure the amount of power you use through a cable, so you taxes pay for the cable to be installed and then you are robed blind to have use of it. All the copper to make the cables was derived at the cost of the environment, the plastic insulation - at the cost of the environment....long list my friend.....TAX the rain....WTF!!!!!!!! Tax your mum you slimy ******** (the government/corporate money hungry *******), for producing useless offspring....

Why not a tax on flatulence, and allow each person to be able to pass wind twice a month tax free.

This is no less ridiculous then when Enron wanted to trade in weather.

http://now.msn.com/maryland-institutes-rain-tax-to-raise-money-for-chesapeake-bay-estuary

This really ticks me off, did anyone notice??? Sorry, nothing personal, just had to vent....

 

Good on you, Maxxx.

 

http://www.gazette.net/article/20130405/NEWS/130409397/-1/the-x2018-rain-tax-x2019&template=gazette

Hahahahahahahahaha.

 

I'm dumbfounded....not idea what to say. What goes through peoples heads when they come up with this crap.