Well, I will just place this here for all of those climate deniers. Skip over the Sex Junk Oh, Oh, Oh, crap at the beginning. The good stuff starts at 1:15.
(05-30-2017 10:27 AM)NIUAlum90 Wrote: Well, I will just place this here for all of those climate deniers. Skip over the Sex Junk Oh, Oh, Oh, crap at the beginning. The good stuff starts at 1:15.
damn. He teed up Bill Nye's gonads and used the Big Bertha driver.
(05-30-2017 10:27 AM)NIUAlum90 Wrote: Well, I will just place this here for all of those climate deniers. Skip over the Sex Junk Oh, Oh, Oh, crap at the beginning. The good stuff starts at 1:15.
(05-30-2017 10:27 AM)NIUAlum90 Wrote: Well, I will just place this here for all of those climate deniers. Skip over the Sex Junk Oh, Oh, Oh, crap at the beginning. The good stuff starts at 1:15.
(05-30-2017 11:24 PM)MplsBison Wrote: Sorry can't find the video. Can you please summarize the arguments/data the video presents? Thanks
Sea level expected to rise 11 inches in the next 100 years. Sea level rose 7 inches in the last century. Sea level has risen 300 feet in the last 12,000 years, a rate of 30 inches per century.
Climate change is real. Kansas once lay under an ocean when the world was much warmer. Ice ages suck, too. Probably not much we can do about either unless we learn to terra form.
Bill Nye is didactic, and a little creepy. Might need a chaperone with the kiddies.
(This post was last modified: 05-31-2017 06:50 AM by bubbapt.)
(05-31-2017 06:47 AM)bubbapt Wrote: Sea level expected to rise 11 inches in the next 100 years. Sea level rose 7 inches in the last century. Sea level has risen 300 feet in the last 12,000 years, a rate of 30 inches per century.
Climate change is real. Kansas once lay under an ocean when the world was much warmer. Ice ages suck, too. Probably not much we can do about either unless we learn to terra form.
Thanks for the video summary.
If the video is trying to present a narrative that greenhouse gas emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels have zero impact on climate change, then the video has been proven wrong already.
(05-31-2017 06:47 AM)bubbapt Wrote: Sea level expected to rise 11 inches in the next 100 years. Sea level rose 7 inches in the last century. Sea level has risen 300 feet in the last 12,000 years, a rate of 30 inches per century.
Climate change is real. Kansas once lay under an ocean when the world was much warmer. Ice ages suck, too. Probably not much we can do about either unless we learn to terra form.
Thanks for the video summary.
If the video is trying to present a narrative that greenhouse gas emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels have zero impact on climate change, then the video has been proven wrong already.
So why are the actions proposed by the AGW alarmists characterized almost universally by significant negative impacts in the short run in exchange for minimal long term benefit?
(This post was last modified: 05-31-2017 01:14 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
(05-31-2017 06:47 AM)bubbapt Wrote: Sea level expected to rise 11 inches in the next 100 years. Sea level rose 7 inches in the last century. Sea level has risen 300 feet in the last 12,000 years, a rate of 30 inches per century.
Climate change is real. Kansas once lay under an ocean when the world was much warmer. Ice ages suck, too. Probably not much we can do about either unless we learn to terra form.
Thanks for the video summary.
If the video is trying to present a narrative that greenhouse gas emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels have zero impact on climate change, then the video has been proven wrong already.
Watch the video, then comment. Not hard, don't let others do your thinking.
(05-31-2017 01:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: So why are the actions proposed by the AGW alarmists characterized almost universally by significant negative impacts in the short run in exchange for minimal long term benefit?
I'm only talking about greenhouse gas emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels having a greater than zero impact on climate change.
I'm not making any claims about positive or negative economic impact from policy requiring wind/solar power.
(05-31-2017 04:21 PM)NIUAlum90 Wrote: Watch the video, then comment.
Sorry, couldn't watch the video. I don't see what the big deal is, why can't we just discuss the arguments/data that the video presents??
(05-31-2017 10:36 PM)MplsBison Wrote: I'm only talking about greenhouse gas emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels having a greater than zero impact on climate change.
Fine. I'm not.
Quote:I'm not making any claims about positive or negative economic impact from policy requiring wind/solar power.
I guess I just find that angle to be far more interesting--and important--than the sky is falling, the sky is falling.
Sorry, poorly worded. I didn't mean to make it sound like I'm unwilling/uninterested in talking about negative economic impacts of phasing out coal power.
I just wanted to make it explicit that those are two different things, and I was previously talking about greenhouse gas effects on climate change. That seemed to be the theme of the thread ...
(05-31-2017 10:58 PM)MplsBison Wrote: Sorry, poorly worded. I didn't mean to make it sound like I'm unwilling/uninterested in talking about negative economic impacts of phasing out coal power.
I just wanted to make it explicit that those are two different things, and I was previously talking about greenhouse gas effects on climate change. That seemed to be the theme of the thread ...
I understand where you are coming from, but how much more is there to say on the subject? If it's really a serious, near catastrophic problem, isn't it time to move on to find serious solutions that will have a material impact?
Take all possible solutions, quantify the impact, identify the costs (both hard and soft), and start doing the best ones from a cost-benefit standpoint first.
Bottom line: We're on fossil fuels for a while. We really don't have a viable replacement for oil. Let's do what we can without losing sight of reality.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2017 05:31 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
We can try our best to be as "environmentally friendly" as we can. That is a noble challenge and I support that effort in regards to clean air and water. However...There is very little we can do about climate change in regard to its natural cycles. Change is going to happen despite our efforts to thwart it. To believe otherwise is an example of the sheer arrogance of humankind.
