Alfa Romeo Bulletin Board & Forums - Reply to Topic
Thread: Do you believe in "global warming?" Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Alfa Romeo Bulletin Board & Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
10-01-2019 01:47 PM
alfamale44
Exactly, Osso. While I think the context of our on-going discussion has been generally interesting, I also think the quality of the discussion itself has become stale, if not stultifying. It's obvious that our in-and-out population of advocates prefer to limit their discussions to defending the methodology and veracity of "climate science" --- while rather obviously ignoring the fact that there is a corresponding effort to completely restructure world economies and societies as a way of meeting the demands of climate change activists. Simply put, you can't achieve those kinds of changes without creating a police state. And police states are not protectors of the kinds of liberties and freedoms we typically take for granted. While this is something that should be under discussion here, it curiously isn't.

As we approach nearly 3000 posts on this 11 year old thread the numerous advocates who have posted here have been noticeably circumspect about any discussion about how, exactly, we should actually go about dealing with the climate changes the "experts" claim is going to doom the earth. In all that time---at least to the best of my knowledge as a long time participant---only Pete has had the courage and intellectual honesty admit the truth: you can't do this stuff without an authoritarian restructuring of modern societies. Instead what we get is navel gazing over the "proof" of climate change predictions.

IMHO, if you want a good example of how you can take an important issue and reduce it to idle, virtue signalling twaddle all you have to do is come here.[/QUOTE]


Well along those lines, it seems the alarmists have completely accepted the "correlation = cause" scenario no matter what. That's not science that's politics and a "make you feel good" exercise. To get beyond that one must look at what can be done about averting this doomsday prediction at the hands of "climate change" and calculate what, and how, and where, and how long, and at what cost this complete energy switch can all come about. Oh, OK wait a minute I remember someone here (yes it was me!) directing people to those scientists (Professor Roger Pielke Jr. and Professor David MacKay, to name just 2) that have already calculated those factors; it's math and the laws of physics folks and nothing else. But for some reason the alarmists are quite afraid of what the answers are and so they just ignore them. I have read and listened to both sides extensively over the past 2-3 years and if someone is afraid of even acknowledging there are two sides to this topic then we should just end this thread now and go our separate clueless (alarmist) ways. This is ALL about politics now because science has left the building.
10-01-2019 10:42 AM
ossodiseppia
Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yearoldspider View Post
... and I'm a Jew so I can use Holocaust humor.
No on this bulletin board. It is offensive to many folks of differing beliefs.
10-01-2019 10:21 AM
20yearoldspider
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutlefan View Post
The sources? The charts are from the National Climate Assessment, the go-to source for many alarmists and True Believers like you. You also claim the MIT Technology Review is a poor source, as is Forbes, CNN (I agree with you there, but not for the same reasons I'm sure), etc.; so from where do you get the powder to sprinkle your non-physics/reality-based unicorn magic? Michael Mann and the like I'd guess. So MIT's Technology Review is unreliable but Mann is, I imagine.

BTW, you are once again resorting to ad hominem. Tony Heller is Dr. Mengele? I can't begin to understand that analogy. Here's a hint though, for humor to be funny, it has to have some semblance of intelligibility. Here's another hint. Holocaust humor is a non sequitur among sane people. It seems common among some segments of society though, unfortunately.

BTW, re walking the talk, I laid out the physics of how renewable energy without nuclear can't possibly power the grid and how we can't possibly manufacture enough battery storage for a non-nuclear renewables-driven grid without ripping up an unimaginable amount of earth. You had no response except to say we'll "agree to disagree." In other words, I haven't seen you make any kind of cogent argument at all; you simply lob insults at whomever.

So you "walk the talk" (who talks like that?; no one I know thankfully); how do the charts from the National Climate Assessment support your position?
The analogy concerned the poster child for that video, Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer, (not Tony Heller whoever the hell that is. certainly not a scientist based on his video) and I'm a Jew so I can use Holocaust humor.

The underlying reason we can't communicate is you see this issue as a political one and I see it as a science issue but just with respect to energy storage technology, you can't assume it's reached it's limit. For example, in the future, instead of a national power grid, perhaps a local (county/city) power grid would be the way to go. Some individual homes are already doing that using wind and/or solar and their own little battery farm. I don't believe nuclear is the future any longer. The waste is a problem and the potential for a catastrophic event is as well and I don't know why we should trust the private sector to keep us safe from that given their profit motive. I just returned from Japan on Saturday and they still have a big energy problem resulting from the Fukishima meltdown a few years ago. Office buildings are required to keep their AC not below 82 degrees and it's hot and humid in Japan in the summertime. It's not comfortable.
10-01-2019 08:32 AM
Rutlefan
Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yearoldspider View Post
Yes. Me again. Once again pointing out your sources are weak tea. Why don't you walk the talk and, next time your are really sick, make an appointment with an economist.
The sources? The charts are from the National Climate Assessment, the go-to source for many alarmists and True Believers like you. You also claim the MIT Technology Review is a poor source, as is Forbes, CNN (I agree with you there, but not for the same reasons I'm sure), etc.; so from where do you get the powder to sprinkle your non-physics/reality-based unicorn magic? Michael Mann and the like I'd guess. So MIT's Technology Review is unreliable but Mann is, I imagine.

BTW, you are once again resorting to ad hominem. Tony Heller is Dr. Mengele? I can't begin to understand that analogy. Here's a hint though, for humor to be funny, it has to have some semblance of intelligibility. Here's another hint. Holocaust humor is a non sequitur among sane people. It seems common among some segments of society though, unfortunately.

BTW, re walking the talk, I laid out the physics of how renewable energy without nuclear can't possibly power the grid and how we can't possibly manufacture enough battery storage for a non-nuclear renewables-driven grid without ripping up an unimaginable amount of earth. You had no response except to say we'll "agree to disagree." In other words, I haven't seen you make any kind of cogent argument at all; you simply lob insults at whomever.

So you "walk the talk" (who talks like that?; no one I know thankfully); how do the charts from the National Climate Assessment support your position?
09-30-2019 02:46 PM
20yearoldspider
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutlefan View Post
You again? Anyway, it's about the charts; the complete charts, as shown in the first eight minutes of the video, not those portions edited for the press, regardless of the presenter. The complete data (as opposed to the cherry-picked data) certainly doesn't suggest there's any kind of climate emergency; not even close.
Yes. Me again. Once again pointing out your sources are weak tea. Why don't you walk the talk and, next time your are really sick, make an appointment with an economist.
09-30-2019 01:28 PM
Rutlefan
Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yearoldspider View Post
Dr. Mengele here is an economist.
You again? Anyway, it's about the charts; the complete charts, as shown in the first eight minutes of the video, not those portions edited for the press, regardless of the presenter. The complete data (as opposed to the cherry-picked data) certainly doesn't suggest there's any kind of climate emergency; not even close.

The truth of it is that everywhere but where it's very very cold, water vapor completely eclipses the greenhouse contribution of C02. So it is not the case that warm places are getting warmer or hot places are getting hotter (hot air still has a lot of water vapor, it just has low relative humidity) but rather that very very cold (and therefore low water vapor content) places -- the Arctic and Antarctic -- are getting very slightly less very very cold. But they are still bitterly cold; they would still be the same deadly threat to the likes of Scott and Shackleton. That's why all those loony tourist expeditions to the Arctic and Antarctic to see "global warming first hand" keep getting stuck in ice, with those ships of fools ending up having to be rescued by carbon-spewing helicopters. Reality keeps getting in the way of their apocalyptic fantasies.
09-30-2019 11:55 AM
bianchi2
Quote:
Originally Posted by guillotineFI View Post
I agree, cyclists act like jack asses, and should stay on the sidewalk. The bike lanes you speak of on the sides of the roads/highways should be removed and make more lanes for vehicle traffic. It drives me crazy when I'm in traffic bottlenecks and a full lane of traffic is consumed by a stupid bike path that nobody is using.
I ride a lot, about 250 miles a week, ave cruising speed 20- 21 mph,, just think of me on a sidewalk at that speed?and most bike paths on the side of the street are only 6 feet wide.. you would need a skinny car for that, and even if you added more lanes,, still would be traffic jams, anyway..also I ride to work about 8 months out of the year, short ride of 22 miles each way..hey, keeps my big Avalon of the street, more room for you..also keeps me slim and fit.. easier to sit in my spider, when shes back on the road
09-29-2019 11:09 AM
20yearoldspider
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutlefan View Post
Dr. Mengele here is an economist.
09-29-2019 12:16 AM
20yearoldspider
Quote:
Originally Posted by guillotineFI View Post
The way I see it it's like vaping.

Maybe it's unsafe to your health, maybe it's not.
The environment or this thread?
09-27-2019 06:59 PM
ARwrench Australia's be like...


https://www.instagram.com/p/B21FhHRl...7LJcQiF-JF82WM
09-27-2019 09:13 AM
180OUT
Quote:
You guys just keep banging your heads and never reaching any kind of consensus. What do you hope to accomplish by stating there is no such thing as global warming vs there is global warming? Neither side seems to be swayed by what the other says. So, what exactly is the point of this thread?
[/QUOTE]


Exactly, Osso. While I think the context of our on-going discussion has been generally interesting, I also think the quality of the discussion itself has become stale, if not stultifying. It's obvious that our in-and-out population of advocates prefer to limit their discussions to defending the methodology and veracity of "climate science" --- while rather obviously ignoring the fact that there is a corresponding effort to completely restructure world economies and societies as a way of meeting the demands of climate change activists. Simply put, you can't achieve those kinds of changes without creating a police state. And police states are not protectors of the kinds of liberties and freedoms we typically take for granted. While this is something that should be under discussion here, it curiously isn't.

As we approach nearly 3000 posts on this 11 year old thread the numerous advocates who have posted here have been noticeably circumspect about any discussion about how, exactly, we should actually go about dealing with the climate changes the "experts" claim is going to doom the earth. In all that time---at least to the best of my knowledge as a long time participant---only Pete has had the courage and intellectual honesty admit the truth: you can't do this stuff without an authoritarian restructuring of modern societies. Instead what we get is navel gazing over the "proof" of climate change predictions.

IMHO, if you want a good example of how you can take an important issue and reduce it to idle, virtue signalling twaddle all you have to do is come here.
09-27-2019 06:53 AM
ossodiseppia
Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yearoldspider View Post
Those dang scientists are getting rich off of doing science with all their fancy book-learning.

This thread should renamed Do you believe there are so many morons in the US?
Just because someone believes something that you don't does not make them a moron.

You guys just keep banging your heads and never reaching any kind of consensus. What do you hope to accomplish by stating there is no such thing as global warming vs there is global warming? Neither side seems to be swayed by what the other says. So, what exactly is the point of this thread?
09-27-2019 05:29 AM
20yearoldspider
Quote:
Originally Posted by kens View Post
Agreed

FEAR = FUNDING
Those dang scientists are getting rich off of doing science with all their fancy book-learning.

This thread should renamed Do you believe there are so many morons in the US?
09-26-2019 08:57 PM
kens https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...ng_crisis.html
09-26-2019 08:49 PM
kens
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfamale44 View Post
....take a close look at the nimrods who put out that 97% consensus crap about man-made global warming and you will find this little group of true believers are grad students, journalists, and a self proclaimed communist professor at the University of San Diego. They all have an agenda and zero credibility.
Agreed

FEAR = FUNDING
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome