ocean conditions are changing due to Rapid Global Climate Shift

The bottom line in environmentalism is simple, "THEY do not believe or practice what they PREACH."

If they did, Los Angeles (and California) would eliminate their pet footprint destroying the ocean environment .....

And Al Gore would have moved to the United States of China and practiced what he preached.

California cleaning up pet waste would do more than what could be achieved by the rest of the USA. Al Gore working to keep Asia cleaner would have been smart. 10 to 20% improvement would have been easy, and inexpensive. And it would have had a greater effect than trying to make changes in the USA and the rest of the world.

Instead, they want to control more, tax more, and waste more.

When I lived in Southern California, I was appalled at how little they cared about the environment. I thought I was a polluter, and they were environmentalists.

I realized, the truth was simple, I practice what I believe. I do not believe in waste. Never have never will. Spilt milk happens, but I do not go around making it happen and then laugh about it.

I believe I have a lot in common with Ybarnacle. I believe in recycling. Always have. Always will.

But, I don't believe in Al Gore making me pay more to be 'cleaner,' so he can pollute more.

Al pollutes more in a year than I could in TEN lifetimes. At least.

IMHO.

Wayne

 

So when you say "they," you're including all 38 million people who live in California? Seems to me you're swinging a pretty wide loop there...

 

Psychology Today -- The Pivotal Role of Perceived Scientific Consensus

 

Skeptical Science.com -- The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism

 

Shaping Tomorrows World -- Debunking Handbook: update and feedback

 

As I mentioned, Watts does a great scientific job of showing global warming as mostly natural. And he shows most alarmism to be the result of activists and politicians.

http://wattsupwiththat.com

Anthony Watts should be an inspiration for us all.

He drives electric, uses LED lighting (I hate LED lights because they are not as bright as flourescent), and he has solar electric ....

And he doesn't jet around while leaving all the lights on in his 60,000 square foot house (600 sq meters).... like Al Gore.

Read the difference between Bush and Gore here at Snopes: http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

.....

 

I have an idea!!!

I am GREEN! I will buy a jet engine, set it up and just let it BURN! Then I will travel the world telling naive young people how great it is to be GREEN!

I will not speak for less than $50,000 a speech.

And I will send my 'reporters' into North Korea to see what they can find. And when they get caught, I will send in our dear leader (Bill Clinton) and promise more nuclear weapon technology ....

If not caught, I will update friends at the company about North Korea ....

I WILL GET RICH!!! Like my Dear Friend and mentor Al Gore.

PS, the actual size of his house is about 20,000 square feet, but none of his usual 'data' includes his 60,000 square foot 'barn' furnished like a house - and using more electricity.

But of course, I am green! I buy renewable energy.

 

Imaginary,

Over fishing has GREATLY reduced nature's carbon footprint. Therefore, ocean plant life need human carbon emissions ....

Look at whales being at near extinction, sharks, and all the small fish.

Panic! Burn more gas ....

I enjoyed how debunking works against science and for PR. The vast majority of weather science shows we have been warming for 10,000 years - since the last ice age.

Yes, human activity is bad. But, burning off farm land in Asia contributes more bad carbon than just about the entire western world .....

Why not educate them as well?

I have florescent lights in most of my house - got rid of the expensive and do not light LED's.

I hate polluting. But, I do not believe polluting science and the brains of our children is any better than polluting our environment ....

I am MUCH greener than Al Gore, not really able to afford 'green' like George Bush.

Wayne

 

As the DOHA Jamboree breaks huddle and the BIG GREEN rent seeking machine jets back home , I'm reading reports that the machine is concerned about the word "Sustainable ".

Seems that by 2110, if current forecast models are accurate , the word sustainable will become ....... Unsustainable ..... A victim of Global Climate change

 

Many climate scientists have issues with the research presented on the WattsUpWithThat web site. Their arguments are rather detailed in nature, so I'll just post the introductory statements. There are many reference links within the articles.

Watts Up With That's continued ignorance regarding Antarctic sea ice

Watts Up With That concludes Greenland is not melting without looking at any actual ice mass data

Watts' New Paper - Analysis and Critique

 

Whether Al Gore is a saint or a sinner is beside the point. If AGW is happening, and if it will create serious problems, then many of us feel it would be prudent to address those problems, irrespective of how Gore, or Bush, or any other politician acts or doesn't act.

 

Michael,

I was reading through Imgainary's, "The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism" (PDF), SCARY!

I will look at their numbers at a very LOW level. I am not a government scientist paid to make these numbers, so I might be a little off. (*)

They cherry pick their data. Like we really had thermometers at the south pole before 1900? And then they still have to exaggerate.

I know we need to moderate our pollution, but this STUPID ARTICLE telling people that scientifically we are setting off 1.5 trillion megatons of nuke warheads a year is not very scientific ....

IMHO.

That is around 200 megatons per person. If we admit most people live way below poverty and financially cannot contribute much, it is 1,500 megatons for the top 12%, that includes CHILDREN.

1,500 * 1,000,000 * 2,000 = 3,000,000,000,000 pounds of explosives per person (divide by 6). That is about 500,000,000,000 gallons of gasoline per person ....

PER YEAR?

If I misunderstood their numbers by a million, that is still 3,000,000 gallons of gasoline a year for me to USE?

I use about 1,000 gallons a year. Multiply that by 10 to count my small house, electric, and leisure .... Their numbers are hundreds of times BIGGER than an approximated and exaggerated real life.

Including children who do not consume as much. Even including the other 7 billion who cannot afford to contribute much, they are still of hundreds of times.

What?

This craziness needs to STOP.

IMHO.

Wayne

(*) I referenced their data in their quote: "The rate of energy building up since 1970 is equivalent to 2.5 Hiroshima bombs every second. (27)"

I used 20 kt for the nominal yield at Hiroshima. Estimates were from 12.5 kt to 25 kt.

3600 seconds * 24 hours * 265 days * 2.5 * 20 kt.

The conversion for gasoline to tnt, but tnt has 1/10th the energy per pound of gasoline.

 

Imaginary,

We know global warming has had to occur, or we would BE IN AN ICE-AGE.

However, you provide other people's research, I dig in it, and it is full of holes.

Science and data do not change.

Regards,

Wayne

 

If scient-ologists would use an argument something like, "From 1400 to 1860's we saw the beginning of man assisted global warming. Then Krakatoa happened, and the Volcanic ash cooled the planet for awhile. But, again, burning wood and coal, man has assisted the world wide global warming about 10 to 20%."

I would agree and point out the two most striking points: First, fossil fuel is less of a problem than burning wood; and second, we need to get people to QUIT burning wood, and burn heating oil.

 

"Many climate scientists have issues with the research presented on the WattsUpWithThat web site. Their arguments are rather detailed in nature, so I'll just post the introductory statements. There are many reference links within the articles."

Many scientists POST on Wattsupwiththat ....

1. The largest known problems caused by man in global warming are:

Rocket launches - no one talks about stopping space programs.

Nuclear explosions - we stopped those for other reasons.

Refrigerant - we stopped that, and then global warming BECAME A PROBLEM - PANIC.

Jet traffic - no one talks about stopping Gore from roaming in his jets.

2. The other thing missing from the discussion is the NORTHWEST PASSAGE.

BEFORE Krakatoa brought the little ice age (there were at least two), there were open sea lanes, but no one had the technology to navigate them. Now we have the technology.

But, wait? Where were the sea lanes for 100 years? They were frozen over by the ice we are told to worry about melting .....

3. I am MUCH greener than Gore. I am much greener than our friends in California.

And I do not feel a need to SCARE children to 'prevent' the future. Mine or theirs.

4. Let us clean up our act - including ASIA. You can affordably cut 25% to 50% of the world's greenhouse emissions in Asia alone.



5. or you could just increase over fishing and eliminate pets - you would be back to about a zero net carbon load ....

It is JUST data.

And therefore REAL solutions are easy. Pie in the sky, "let's create a panic and tax them into submission" is right out of Alinsky. He was a genius, and people use his techniques. But, that doesn't mean I need to listen to them.

Wayne

PS: I have noted repeatedly, and do so again, I am against pollution. I am for clean energy. And I am against scaring our children.