Winter To Come "with A Vengeance"

[CurrentAffairs]

Dang, and we were going to have a big global warming celebration at my house this weekend.

Those who think that winter 2006-2007 is going to remain mild are in for a shock," said Bastardi. "Winter is likely to come with a vengeance. A week from now, we'll start seeing truly cold air across much of the country, and we expect this change to last."

ADC 2006

 

[ARealConservative]

Hi.


Denver just called. They asked me to tell you to STFU.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Denver just called. They asked me to tell you to STFU.

Hey, let me gloat. It's not every day I get to thumb my nose at their weather.

 

[Conservationist]

Awesome. Let's hope these ueber cold winters kill off some of the idiots!

 

[72_lemans]

YAY! Super cold weather and tons of SNOW!!! finally, we've been waiting for it all winter now and have been thinkin it's not coming. YAY! Now I have a reason to dig out the snowmobiles.

 

[saggyjones]

European ski resorts are hoping for sudden snowfalls to rescue the start to their season after an unusually warm autumn left slopes bereft of snow.

BBC NEWS | Europe | Ski resorts sweat in warm weather

There's so much evidence out there I don't even have to make an effort anymore! Now I'll refute your points:

Those who think that winter 2006-2007 is going to remain mild are in for a shock," said Bastardi. "Winter is likely to come with a vengeance. A week from now, we'll start seeing truly cold air across much of the country, and we expect this change to last."

The key word is remain; winter is starting later but has been milder than usual so far.

Denver just called. They asked me to tell you to STFU.

Global warming isn't felt overnight, or even in one year. If you look at my graphs and quote you will see the climate is changing, if gradually. The earth is a big thing and doesn't change very quickly.

My next post will be the usual evidence I post which comes as close to proving as possible that global warming is occurring.

 

[saggyjones]

^^^1. Massive melting

Carbon dioxide levels are substantially higher now than at any time in the last 800,000 years, the latest study of ice drilled out of Antarctica confirms.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Deep ice tells long climate story

Of these activities fossil fuel combustion for energy generation causes about 70-75% of the carbon dioxide emissions, being the main source of carbon dioxide emissions.

Carbon dioxide

Carbon dioxide output, caused by humans burning fossil fuels, have drastically raised in recent years, as shown by the graph and two quotes.

Increased levels of carbon dioxide will increase the capture of heat in its absorption band to some, perhaps significant, extent. The result of this is that less heat is lost to space from the Earth's lower atmosphere, and temperatures at the Earth's surface are therefore likely to increase.

Global Warming - science

Greenhouse gas emissions from industry, transportation and agriculture have played a major role in the recently observed global warming.

Greenhouse gas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Greenhouse gases directly affect global warming, and with a higher amount of greenhouse gases, the earth is getting warmer.

 

[ARealConservative]

Global warming isn't felt overnight, or even in one year. If you look at my graphs and quote you will see the climate is changing, if gradually. The earth is a big thing and doesn't change very quickly.

My post was intended to be tongue in cheek.

But yes, the climate is most certainly changing...As it always has.

 

[saggyjones]

My post was intended to be tongue in cheek.

But yes, the climate is most certainly changing...As it always has.

Did you look at my CO2 levels graph? Please explain how the sudden increases in CO2 and temperature are not directly related. If you can't, move on to explaining how humans aren't causing the massive output of CO2.

 

[ARealConservative]

Did you look at my CO2 levels graph? Please explain how the sudden increases in CO2 and temperature are not directly related. If you can't, move on to explaining how humans aren't causing the massive output of CO2.

I'm like 10 steps ahead. I'm busy wondering which segment of the population the greeners would support killing off to solve the problem?

I mean, we don't control much of the globe, so we need to start killing entire populations that aren't under our control to have any real effect.

Which ones do we start with?

 

[Sauwan]

I mean, we don't control much of the globe, so we need to start killing entire populations that aren't under our control to have any real effect.

Which ones do we start with?

How about this one?

Don't get me wrong, I love my meat, but if you think that the only way to fix the problem is to kill off some population, then that's probably the best place to start.

However, for those who aren't so simple minded, there are plenty of small things everyone can do to make significant changes.

 

[ARealConservative]

How about this one?

Don't get me wrong, I love my meat, but if you think that the only way to fix the problem is to kill off some population, then that's probably the best place to start.

However, for those who aren't so simple minded, there are plenty of small things everyone can do to make significant changes.

Sure, a bunch of small things can have an effect, if everybody complies of course.

So what you are saying is my death squads need alternate training. We will call them the Environmental Goon Squad - their motto: "you can live as long as you do all the little things we tell you to do".

 

[Sauwan]

Sure, a bunch of small things can have an effect, if everybody complies of course.

So what you are saying is my death squads need alternate training. We will call them the Environmental Goon Squad - their motto: "you can live as long as you do all the little things we tell you to do".

Yeah. Exactly what I was saying.:2brickwal

 

[ARealConservative]

Yeah. Exactly what I was saying.:2brickwal

you really didn't say much of anything that is workable, so I'm not sure why you're banging your head against the wall.

 

[Sauwan]

you really didn't say much of anything that is workable, so I'm not sure why you're banging your head against the wall.

Oh, well you didn't really make it clear you wanted some suggestions of how you could help.

Try these (especially #6 IMO)

Edit: And I was banging my head on the wall because your conclusion about what I was trying to say was incomprehensible.

 

[saggyjones]

I'm like 10 steps ahead. I'm busy wondering which segment of the population the greeners would support killing off to solve the problem?

I mean, we don't control much of the globe, so we need to start killing entire populations that aren't under our control to have any real effect.

Which ones do we start with?

Good, a conservative who realizes we are causing global warming. Well, the "greeners" don't support killing anyone, they support finding alternative energy sources. On another thread I was discussing with jfuh that nuclear energy could be the energy we need. Here are the benefits:

The fission of an atom of uranium produces 10 million times the energy produced by the combustion of an atom of carbon from coal.

Nuclear Energy is the most certain future source.

Bernard Cohen has shown that with breeder reactors, we can have plenty of energy for some billions of year.

Nuclear Energy is the most certain future source.

Nuclear energy uses an abundant, widely distributed fuel, and mitigates the greenhouse effect if used to replace fossil-fuel-derived electricity.

Nuclear power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

^^^This will only get better over time because if you fuse hydrogen into helium and produce an extremely low amount of CO2 rather than just a low amount, and current reactors don't do this.

Storage is the only problem, but because fused waste gets less reactive over time it's easy to store. My idea is launching it into space.

Also with better technology there is a very small chance of a nuclear meltdown, the old ones are the only risk and they would be replaced in a massive shift to nuclear energy.

 

[ARealConservative]

Oh, well you didn't really make it clear you wanted some suggestions of how you could help.

Try these (especially #6 IMO)

Edit: And I was banging my head on the wall because your conclusion about what I was trying to say was incomprehensible.

You didn't comprehend what I was saying?

So ask for clarification. I thought it was obvious myself but would be happy to clarify.

You proposed some small ideas that individuals can follow to make a difference. I'm stating that those small things won't do a damn thing unless everybody follows them, which isn't going to happen. You will have to achieve your solutions through sheer force to make a difference.

 

[Sauwan]

You didn't comprehend what I was saying?

So ask for clarification. I thought it was obvious myself but would be happy to clarify.

You proposed some small ideas that individuals can follow to make a difference. I'm stating that those small things won't do a damn thing unless everybody follows them, which isn't going to happen. You will have to achieve your solutions through sheer force to make a difference.

Well like Saggyjones has noted, individuals really don't have to make a difference. Power generation is the largest source of emissions, so if the country can largely switch from fossil fuel to a clean source (as he has noted above to be Nuclear plants) we can make a large impact with no change in the lives of individuals.

Your line of thought that we need force to get everyone to make small changes is asinine. All it takes is a little information. If people weren't so ignorant as to deny global warming, and people bought energy efficient light bulbs (which last longer and use significantly less energy) rather than the outdated bulbs most people use now, we would see a massive difference.

But hey, in the next presidential election, don't bother voting because your one vote is too insignificant.

 

[ARealConservative]

Well like Saggyjones has noted, individuals really don't have to make a difference. Power generation is the largest source of emissions, so if the country can largely switch from fossil fuel to a clean source (as he has noted above to be Nuclear plants) we can make a large impact with no change in the lives of individuals.

Your line of thought that we need force to get everyone to make small changes is asinine. All it takes is a little information. If people weren't so ignorant as to deny global warming, and people bought energy efficient light bulbs (which last longer and use significantly less energy) rather than the outdated bulbs most people use now, we would see a massive difference.

But hey, in the next presidential election, don't bother voting because your one vote is too insignificant.

You seem to be all over the place to the point that I must question your actual insight on these issues.

Anybody can read a few internet sites and come away thinking they have a clue, which is something I try very hard to not committ. The biggest problem with this issue is all the posers that try to claim real insight when none exists. I'm most certainly looking in your direction now.

So, switching to flourescent bulbs is going to do enough to "see a massive difference"? Care to share your keen scientific studies that allowed you to come to such a conclusion (more like where did you read that info that you have now accepted as factual)

 

[Sauwan]

You seem to be all over the place to the point that I must question your actual insight on these issues.

Anybody can read a few internet sites and come away thinking they have a clue, which is something I try very hard to not committ. The biggest problem with this issue is all the posers that try to claim real insight when none exists. I'm most certainly looking in your direction now.

So, switching to flourescent bulbs is going to do enough to "see a massive difference"? Care to share your keen scientific studies that allowed you to come to such a conclusion (more like where did you read that info that you have now accepted as factual)

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Lighting the key to energy saving

Wikihow

More numbers

 

[ARealConservative]

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Lighting the key to energy saving

Wikihow

More numbers

just as I suspected.

 

[Sauwan]

just as I suspected.

That I learn things a posteriori? It must be a remarkable skill to learn everything a priori. Or were you going for the point that I actually read the news and am informed about the world around me?

As long as we're going on a personal attack, let's recap your various attempts to minimize my points:

So what you are saying is my death squads need alternate training. We will call them the Environmental Goon Squad - their motto: "you can live as long as you do all the little things we tell you to do".

Mischaracterization. Maybe a hint of some poison in the well.

You will have to achieve your solutions through sheer force to make a difference.

A false choice. (either do nothing or do it by force)

You seem to be all over the place to the point that I must question your actual insight on these issues.

just as I suspected.

A blatent Ad Hominem.

I don't know if you were going for this, but all we need is Troy McClure and we would have the perfect episode of "how not to argue your point".

 

[saggyjones]

You seem to be all over the place to the point that I must question your actual insight on these issues.

Anybody can read a few internet sites and come away thinking they have a clue, which is something I try very hard to not committ. The biggest problem with this issue is all the posers that try to claim real insight when none exists. I'm most certainly looking in your direction now.

So, switching to flourescent bulbs is going to do enough to "see a massive difference"? Care to share your keen scientific studies that allowed you to come to such a conclusion (more like where did you read that info that you have now accepted as factual)

Hey jackass did you even read my post? I made a valid point but you choose to completely disregard it just like almost all conservatives have with my global warming arguments. You admit that humans are causing global warming but the problem is how to solve it, and I provided a completely logical response but you don't even respond to it. Please read my post and see if you can refute that, and if you can't be a man and admit your mistake.

 

[ARealConservative]

Hey jackass did you even read my post? I made a valid point but you choose to completely disregard it just like almost all conservatives have with my global warming arguments. You admit that humans are causing global warming but the problem is how to solve it, and I provided a completely logical response but you don't even respond to it. Please read my post and see if you can refute that, and if you can't be a man and admit your mistake.

first, you call me names, then make demands of me?


:rofl

 

[saggyjones]

first, you call me names, then make demands of me?


:rofl

Yep that's exactly what I did. So since I provided a valid response to your question will you please refute it, or say you can't? Or can you not back up what you say?