Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
by gcomeau
» Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:52 pm
|
|
|
gcomeau
Posts: 2747
|
People forget how bad things were before the EPA really took a hand on air quality regs.  And yes, that's smog.... not fog. |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by biochem
» Tue Mar 15, 2016 8:51 am
|
|
|
biochem
Posts: 1372
|
Couldn't resist.
Animas River before EPA (left). Animas River after EPA (right). |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by gcomeau
» Tue Mar 15, 2016 4:10 pm
|
|
|
gcomeau
Posts: 2747
|
Zing... but we do all get the difference between one isolated accident that happened during the cleanup of a contaminated mining site and policies that simply establish a universal environment of "Pollution? Meh, none of our business or concern... as you were..." |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by thinkstoomuch
» Mon Mar 21, 2016 6:42 am
|
|
|
thinkstoomuch
Posts: 2727
|
An interesting take on energy. Understand it is from a pro nuke site.
It is fairly long and I tend to think they try to be even handed about it. Lots of information. Other opinions will probably differ. Surprise! http://euanmearns.com/the-looming-nordic-energy-crisis/ Make of it what you will. I probably won't be responding to replies just a post for informational purposes. Have fun, T2M -----------------------
Q: “How can something be worth more than it costs? Isn’t everything ‘worth’ what it costs?” A: “No. That’s just the price. ... Christopher Anvil from Top Line in "War Games" |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by smr
» Wed Mar 23, 2016 11:12 am
|
|
|
smr
Posts: 1522
|
Climate change: then we have reports of falling ocean levels on the east coast of North America!
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/falling-sea-level/ |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by Howard T. Map-addict
» Wed Mar 23, 2016 11:33 am
|
|
|
Howard T. Map-addict
Posts: 1392
|
Regarding those two pictures of Manhattan, 1973 & 2016,
at the top of Page 4: Wow! the quality of picture film has sure improved in 43 years!      Naughty Moose |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by gcomeau
» Wed Mar 23, 2016 12:16 pm
|
|
|
gcomeau
Posts: 2747
|
How fucking gullible can you be? That guy puts up two graphs, Atlantic City NJ and The Battery NY sea levels. But he only shows a handful of years in a noisy data set that he specifically sliced out so he could draw a fit line through only that section of the data that would slope EVER SO SLIGHTLY downward and he could claim dropping sea levels. The same as those morons who took a few years after a record high global average temperature was reached where the record wasn't broken again to claim the earth was actually cooling. (Until, oops, the record got broken again a year or two later. Then broken again. Then broken again...) Meanwhile, in reality.... Atlantic City: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltren ... id=8534720 The Battery: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltren ... id=8518750 And to expand the view... Boston: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltren ... id=8443970 Portland (Maine): http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltren ... id=8418150 Philadelphia: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltren ... id=8545240 Baltimore: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltren ... id=8574680 Charleston: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltren ... id=8665530 See how if you only look at a handful of years you can find lots of places where you could slice the data out starting at a local peak, end it before the next upswing, and pretend that's all there is, and claim sea levels are dropping... but the long term trend is a steady rise? Stop falling for idiotic arguments just because they support your preconceived biases and face reality. |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by The E
» Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:29 am
|
|
|
The E
Posts: 2704
|
As usual, climate change deniers use weather data to try to disprove statements about the climate. Now, read that sentence carefully. "Weather" and "climate" are different things. "Weather" is what you see out the window. "Climate" is what a weather satellite sees. If something in your weather runs counter to trends observed in the climate, then that does not invalidate anything. |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by thinkstoomuch
» Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:33 am
|
|
|
thinkstoomuch
Posts: 2727
|
And as usual the tree huggers fail to understand what a term means. Satellites measure current weather. Just like the window. Granted it is to a wider stage but still weather. Thought that was basic. Whatever, T2M -----------------------
Q: “How can something be worth more than it costs? Isn’t everything ‘worth’ what it costs?” A: “No. That’s just the price. ... Christopher Anvil from Top Line in "War Games" |
| Top | |
| Re: Climate | |
|---|---|
|
by biochem
» Sat Mar 26, 2016 11:03 am
|
|
|
biochem
Posts: 1372
|
I saw one comment from a genuine climate scientist on the news. (Terrible shock, the news prefers to quote from "scientists" who sound like hysterical street preachers than responsible PhDs). Anyway he was commenting that when discussing temperature and climate change that one should use decade long averages and control for El Nino, anything less is weather not climate. The key isn't satellite simply other methods, but the length of time of the measurement.
|
| Top | |