man made global warming a Hoax?

[tenorplayer23]

Hey Scott,



Come on, it hasn`t been the "Soviet Union" for almost 20 years! Remember??



I think you have some of your conclusions mixed up and what you`ve said about the frequency of storms/severity isn`t correct in the sense of ice melt, falling water temperatures in the oceans, the patterns of storm centers,etc.. Living in TX, you see a lot of tornadoes and the impact of warm/cold fronts colliding & causing severe weather. Not necessarily the same process.



As far as water tables go, a a few inches will make a big difference to areas existing at sea level today. In addition, you have to have seen the publications out there re: to island nations in danger of losing their land simply because of rising seas, right. For you and I in land-locked land USA< maybe not such a big deal, but along our seaboards, it is a big deal. As far as the frequency of hurricanes and major storms around the world, it is all about trend. The bad news is, no one point or even a very few points of data will tell us whether the theories about storm activity or any other climatic event are correct. It is a large collection of data and regressions to eliminate other natural or man made influences.



Given that it is today a BALMY 7F here in the frozen tundra of upstate New York, I too would likely prefer warmer weather. Maybe not 110F every day, but given the choice, I think it would be better! :). This cold stuff sucks......but, unfortunately, around here, it goes with the territory.



BTW, PINKS was a repeat. I think they are done for a couple of months........and it IS a shame that all those cars might be a thing of the past as we move forward with all these issues. I LOVE muscle cars of the late-60`s/early-70`s......wish I had that Dart you showed me (I`d especially like a `Cuda or a Challenger big block.........but, they`re way out of my price range if they are any good. Ugh.......) On the other hand, if we could reduce the CO2 output of what we drive everyday, we could probably afford to keep our high output vehicles of that era or any, for that matter. That`s Jay Leno`s theory anyway......we just need to do the math!!



Say, keep the threads coming. Enjoy your work........and, have a good holiday too! :D



See ya. :wavey








I grew up in Phoenix, hot weather doesn`t phase me. I work outside in it all day in the summer (often in the full sun) then go put 23-32 miles on my road bike in the early evening.







I`m not talking about just the Dallas area but world-wide. Do you know that the Soviet Union is looking for ways to seed clouds to reduce heavy snow and the associated costs in Moscow?



Moscow`s mayor plans to alter weather to stop heavy snow - Story - Home - 3 News (http://www.3news.co.nz/Moscows-mayor-plans-to-alter-weather-to-stop-heavy-snow/tabid/209/articleID/126324/cat/41/Default.aspx)







If the poles are warming faster as the scientists claim, then the severity of storms will be lessened, not increased. You get severe strorms because of the clashes between hot and cold air masses. If the poles warm faster, than the temperature differences between air masses will be less and reduce the severity of spring and early summer storms. Rainfall would probably increase but storms wouldn`t be as bad.



After Katrina, didn`t we hear dire warnings about increased and more severe hurricane activity? How`s that prediction working out so far?







A few inches is not going to have a huge impact.







My winter electrical bills are usually higher than my summer electrical bills. :nixweiss



I have the thermostat on 68 in the winter and 72 in the summer.







Those changes mean more cars run and spew out CO2, are you sure you want to support that?

[Scottwax]

I think you have some of your conclusions mixed up and what you`ve said about the frequency of storms/severity isn`t correct in the sense of ice melt, falling water temperatures in the oceans, the patterns of storm centers,etc.. Living in TX, you see a lot of tornadoes and the impact of warm/cold fronts colliding & causing severe weather. Not necessarily the same process.



My point is that while precipitation amounts may increase, warmer air at the poles means less severe storms.



I still haven`t seen a shred of proof that the current climate is the one that needs to be locked in.



As someone who seems to have faith in the climate change models, wouldn`t you at least agree that governments of the world and the UN are using it as an excuse for a huge money grab?

[tenorplayer23]

Well, the temperature climbed to a balmier, current temperature of 18F right now. I think I saw a BIG 80F notation right on top of TX on the last national forecast map. Now is a good time to enjoy that, because this cold & snowy stuff just sucks. The worst part is the decreasing daylight/sunshine on top of it. Oh well......just a few months and we`ll be on the upside again. Plus, if I am less coherent with my comments tonight......I had another (usually every 3 mo.) appt. with one of my MD`s today about a post-operative scan I had last Monday. Have had great results for the past yr. after the big abdominal surgery I had, post-surgery radiation/chemotherapy, etc. She said it was most likely nothing to worry about (she wasn`t worried) but that I needed another scan to look at something and rule out any problem. Want to talk about anxiety!! :nervous2: I told them to schedule it today while I was there, but that was a little "quick", so back I go on Sunday & then the results on Monday. Makes the debate on GW seem petty in comparison.



But, I digress, since it is just a weight on me right now......but, back to climate change (thanks for listening to my fears barking out loud).



Do I think there is a huge money grab going on? No. Do I think there is plenty of opportunity for arbitrage within political/financial aspects of the climate change issue? Yes, plenty! I view much of the difficulties in this whole situation as being less scientific and more, how to "operationalize" the changes necessary to help the problem. It`s a big organizational issue like I described in one of the earlier threads.



If you follow the top daily headlines from the Copenhagen conference, much of the debate & negotiation has little to do with the science (or validity of it) and much more to do with how to implement emissions control(and who should do what). And, who, of course, who is going to pay what to change the sources of CO2 emissions. Big negotiations between Chine/US, as well as the major industrial nations AND the developing or currently underdeveloped countries that either don`t want to pay the price of better controlled mfg. processes or really can`t afford it. This is where the financial incentives come in to get somebody else to pay them for the changes....and where the biggest chances are for us to assume a leadership position in contributing/subsidize these nations to do better emission-wise.....AND NOT get what we are paying for. In my opinion, this will need to be something like Ronald Reagan`s "trust but verify" moniker. Especially with the Chinese. The way industry is moving, China is already the biggest CO2 emitter (US #2) followed by India, etc.. That`s where the biggest financial f=risk is.....what do we end up doing to get them to comply with the challenges.......????? Ugh.......and we`re worrying about whether good tool boxes are made there!:)



Speaking of tools..........have you tried the new PC 7424XP and new Griot`s polishers side by side?? I was reading another thread about the differences (seemed like some specs-manship maybe) but wondered whether you had actually handled both. (Just FYI.....my new PCXP was made in Mexico:))



Let me know.....thx.



See ya. :wavey



Bob






My point is that while precipitation amounts may increase, warmer air at the poles means less severe storms.



I still haven`t seen a shred of proof that the current climate is the one that needs to be locked in.



As someone who seems to have faith in the climate change models, wouldn`t you at least agree that governments of the world and the UN are using it as an excuse for a huge money grab?

[Scottwax]

Do you really think the leaders of many of these smaller nations will actually use the money provided for cleaner energy? There are a lot of corrupt leaders who will skim a lot of money right off the top for their own use. Just like the states here who got all that tobacco settlement money and how little of it went to the intended use. Instead of money, we could work with them to develop clean energy.



I have a G110, haven`t used the 7424 XP or the Griots. My Dewalt 849 is my correction workhorse anyway.

[nailzer]

After Katrina, didn`t we hear dire warnings about increased and more severe hurricane activity? How`s that prediction working out so far?



I heard Brad Pitt make that prediction on the news not long after Katrina. :chuckle: