Global warming, WHY?

[Robert]

Have you ever wondered why this is still a hot topic, especially when we are in some of the worst cold fronts? Why its being taught in schools and we pay for carbon credits like slaves, even though its based on a faulty research.

  I have known the reasons behind it but what concerns me is the the new openness of the true intentions of this agenda. Why now, why are they not worried about people being upset at the true agenda. Do you remember the Georgia Guide stones and what was written on them?

I also have to ask why is government imposing carbon credits as taxes and other levies on US citizens and teaching this in school when a good portion of the US citizens are not for this?

 Also the US is not a major polluter like many countries and has done its fair share of stopping pollution. We see here one leg of the world government to impose its ideas and control over all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
Unite humanity with a living new language.
Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
Balance personal rights with social duties.
Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature

      How many people would be needed to kill off to achieve their utopian aspirations?  

 Well, globalist Ted Turner in a moment of honesty said when confronted by We Are Change that the population should be reduced to 2 billion down from 7 billion.

   So how do we get there?

The UN established the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) and that this panel and it's offshoots are now at the forefront of the argument for population reduction.

 As we close in on the end date for the UN's Agenda 2030, which calls for a radical shift of human production from oil and other large scale energy sources into small scale “renewable energies”, there is only 10 years left for the globalists to achieve their goals if they hope to meet their announced deadline.

This would require a violent change in human society and most of all industrialized nations.

       Why do we need to get there?

The human population would have to be reduced dramatically in order to survive on the meager energy output of renewables alone.

      How do we get people behind the push?

 Climate science. In the early 1990's the Club Of Rome published a book called 'The First Global Revolution'. In it they state:

    “In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes. and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”

DR. ROBERT MULLER Former UN Assistant Secretary General Co founder and Former Chancellor of the UN University for Peace in Costa Rica. During my fifty-three years of global service with the United Nations I was particularly struck by the following factors in the world situation:

Our new, overriding concern: the salvation and preservation of the Earth

http://www.goodmorningworld.org/earthgov/

THE UNITED NATIONS MUST BE VASTLY STRENGTHENED TO RESOLVE THE MAJOR GLOBAL PROBLEMS HENCEFORTH INCREASINGLY CONFRONTING HUMANITY AND THE EARTH. IT MUST BE EMPOWERED TO ADOPT AND ENFORCE WORLD LAWS AND REGULATIONS.

  For a closer look into this subject below are 3 sources and the bottom one being Dr, Robert Mullers' site it is very interesting considering he was the UN Assistant Secretary general.

Globalists Openly Admit To Population Control Agenda - And That's A Bad Sign...
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/globalists-openly-admit-population-control-agenda-and-thats-bad-sign

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

http://www.goodmorningworld.org/earthgov/

https://www.statista.com/chart/12211/the-countries-polluting-the-oceans-the-most/

https://www.undispatch.com/map-day-countries-pollution-kills-people/

[..]

It's CLIMATE CHANGE.

Sheesh everyone knows that 

"Global Warming" doesn't work when regions are colder than usual.

[bscrive]

Governments know they can make a crap load of money from it so it ain't going away anytime soon

[F6Dave]

CO2 comprises about 400 parts per million of our atmosphere.  Before the industrial revolution it was about 300 PPM, so man may have contributed about 100 PPM.  That's ONE TEN-THOUSANTH of the atmosphere!

I wouldn't be surprised if man's activities have warmed the earth by a tiny amount.  However, I personally believe a bit of warning is a GOOD thing.  If you look through history, during the warmer times (like the medieval warm period) civilization thrived.  During the cold periods (like the little ice age) plagues and famines broke out.

The benefits of energy far outweigh the downsides, and fossil fuels provide over 80% of the earth's energy.  Despite massive investment and subsidies that number is only expected to drop by about 1% by 2050.

[0leman]

Names change, it started out as Global Warming, Then Climate Change, now Climate Crises. 

Names change but still the same BS.   Climate has always change and probably always will.  How a gas that is Dave said above 400 plus parts per million in the atmosphere can as a green house gas cause the temperature to rise as much as stated by some folks.   Water vapor is the major green house gas not CO2

The global temps have been raising since the "Little Ice Age" ended somewhere in the 18 century.  Naturally raising temps not man caused.  Right now if you really read the studies, no one can scientifically  state with data that man has caused any of this raise.  The so called Computer generated climate change projections have a lot of problems with them as there are so many unknow that they are worthless. 

There is no way that we can go with wind/solar energy producing methods to supply our energy needs.  There is not enough land to do this, which is pretty obvious if one looks at that our energy needs are today, then see how many solar panels/wind turbines you need to supply the power. Also figuring in that these two energy producing methods only produce power with the wind blows or sun shines.  Right now the going rate is 20-30% of "Name Plate" rates (Name Plate is the amount of energy that they produce under optional conditions).  Also that these energy producers will need to general enough energy to charge Batteries to supply energy with sun doesn't shine and wind doesn't blow.   

[..]

The Earth burps and there's nuttin we can do about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1257_Samalas_eruption

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpqcixiZX64

https://www.volcanodiscovery.com/volcano-map.html

Let's hear the climate/global/warming/change alarmists explain this away.

[Wizzard]

Y'all need to read Michael Crichton's state of fear and it makes it all understandable. Its about the money and power.

[G-Man]

Just another reason I am fond of our president.  He pulled us out of the FAKE climate change accord where the deal was that American wealth would CONTINUE (not all of a sudden start) to be redistributed to OTHER countries to "help turn them green".

Dennis Prager and Marc Levin asked the same question...........  Why does/did ALL of the environmental crisis over the last 5 decade have the same solution???  Increased regulations and taxation, the redistribution of American wealth outside of the country.

[98valk]

man has zero to do with the climate. The earth itself from various sources puts out more so -called pollution in a single day than all humans do in one yr.
global cooling aka mini-ice age is beginning right now. low sun activity results cold earth and increased cosmic rays hitting earth which causes unusual weather.

https://abruptearthchanges.com/2018/01/14/climate-change-grand-solar-minimum-and-cosmic-rays/

What to expect in a Grand Solar Minimum. How does an increase in galactic cosmic rays affect the Earth’s climate and also tectonic activity?

Here is a simplified description of the basic mechanism:

A solar maximum is the period within the 11-year solar cycle of high solar magnetic field and high sunspot count. Sunspots are highly magnetic and visually dark spots or ‘holes’ in the photosphere of the sun, where solar flares can erupt.

A solar minimum is the low activity trough of the 11-year solar cycle (Schwabe Cycle). A Grand Solar Minimum is a period of several successive very low Schwabe Cycles, usually coinciding with phases of climate disruption and – in the long run -cooling. An example is the Maunder Minimum (c. 1645 and 1715) that coincided with the coldest phase of the Little Ice Age. The Little Ice Age, from which we have been emerging since c. 1850, was the coldest period of at least the last 8,000 years, possibly the entire Holocene. Grand Solar Minima recur in clusters roughly every 200-400 years. 27 Grand Minima have been identified during the Holocene (Usoskin et al. 2007). Thus, we were in Grand Solar Minimum about 1/6 of the total time.

The sun emits a magnetic field through the solar wind (flow of charged particles) that reaches as far as the outer planets, this region of the sun’s influence is called the heliosphere.

[Alien]

Ok.  First, I am not arguing that humanity is to blame for climate shifts.  I am arguing, however, that the climate and weather patterns ARE changing.  In my own home town, it was over 80 degrees yesterday.  In mid November.  When I was a kid, November was cold and rainy. 

I have spent 20 years in Emergency Management and we have seen a notable increase in the frequency and severity of natural disasters. 

I have no real opinion as to the cause of these changes.  My job is simply to prepare for and respond to the disasters.

But don't for a second become so involved with the arguments about why these changes are occurring that you stop accepting the fact that changes are taking place.

Ride Safe,

Alien

[Wizzard]

Ok.  First, I am not arguing that humanity is to blame for climate shifts.  I am arguing, however, that the climate and weather patterns ARE changing.  In my own home town, it was over 80 degrees yesterday.  In mid November.  When I was a kid, November was cold and rainy. 

I have spent 20 years in Emergency Management and we have seen a notable increase in the frequency and severity of natural disasters. 

I have no real opinion as to the cause of these changes.  My job is simply to prepare for and respond to the disasters.

But don't for a second become so involved with the arguments about why these changes are occurring that you stop accepting the fact that changes are taking place.

Ride Safe,

Alien

Changes have been taking place since the day this planet was formed.

[G-Man]

Ok.  First, I am not arguing that humanity is to blame for climate shifts.  I am arguing, however, that the climate and weather patterns ARE changing.  In my own home town, it was over 80 degrees yesterday.  In mid November.  When I was a kid, November was cold and rainy. 

I have spent 20 years in Emergency Management and we have seen a notable increase in the frequency and severity of natural disasters. 

I have no real opinion as to the cause of these changes.  My job is simply to prepare for and respond to the disasters.

But don't for a second become so involved with the arguments about why these changes are occurring that you stop accepting the fact that changes are taking place.

Ride Safe,

Alien

Changes have been taking place since the day this planet was formed.

And this has never been denied.

A freak day here and there is not indicative of change.  Here in the U.S. the north east has mild winters and mild summers with low humidity.  The southeast has warm winters and hot summers with high humidity.  Northwest has a mild, wet climate, southwest is hot and dry.  Hasn't changed in hundreds of years.

But, over thousands and millions of years the forests became desserts, lakes and oceans dried up while new ones carved out canyons, and the continents separated and continue to heave and slide.

[Moonshot_1]

Ok.  First, I am not arguing that humanity is to blame for climate shifts.  I am arguing, however, that the climate and weather patterns ARE changing.  In my own home town, it was over 80 degrees yesterday.  In mid November.  When I was a kid, November was cold and rainy. 

I have spent 20 years in Emergency Management and we have seen a notable increase in the frequency and severity of natural disasters. 

I have no real opinion as to the cause of these changes.  My job is simply to prepare for and respond to the disasters.

But don't for a second become so involved with the arguments about why these changes are occurring that you stop accepting the fact that changes are taking place.

Ride Safe,

Alien

Yes, we have seen a notable increase in the frequency and severity of natural disasters.  Pretty much because we keep building where it is dangerous to build. Keep increasing population density in these same areas. I'd probably dispute the frequency part but suggest that in the past the storms and such would blow through nothing where now there are vast suburbs, coastal cities and gazillion dollar homes.

Yeah, the severity would increase. 

[Oss]

Alien and Mike this is true.

It does seem 1000 yr storms come now every year or so

So what should we do?

Maybe stop building below sea level?

Maybe pay attention to flood zones and do not build there?

Maybe pay more attention to what nature is telling us?

The source of heat is elemental, it is the sun. We are miniscule.

However we humans do pollute and it is not really the USA doing the worst of it by any means

But we can be involved in Tikun Olam which is repairing the world.

Better to create industries to clean stuff up than to cry the sky is falling
and punish citizens of our country for the globalists failures

Oss

but what the hell do I know

[Ramie]

Y'all need to read Michael Crichton's state of fear and it makes it all understandable. Its about the money and power.

Excellent book!

[..]

Ok.  First, I am not arguing that humanity is to blame for climate shifts.  I am arguing, however, that the climate and weather patterns ARE changing.  In my own home town, it was over 80 degrees yesterday.  In mid November.  When I was a kid, November was cold and rainy. 

I have spent 20 years in Emergency Management and we have seen a notable increase in the frequency and severity of natural disasters. 

I have no real opinion as to the cause of these changes.  My job is simply to prepare for and respond to the disasters.

But don't for a second become so involved with the arguments about why these changes are occurring that you stop accepting the fact that changes are taking place.

Ride Safe,

Alien

Changes have been taking place since the day this planet was formed.

 

20 years is so minute compared to the life of this planet.

Show me the weather records from 5,000 : 50,000 : 500,000 : 5,000,000 years ago.

20 years is so insignificant it's laughable.

Do you honestly think that we humans could F it up in 20 years???

[98valk]

if anybody want to read how it all started in the 1960s as a result of a global think tank report called Report From Iron Mountain, can read the book The Greening on this site
https://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/greening.shtml

(below is excerpt from the book)
In Section 5, entitled "The Functions of War," the Report states, "As we have indicated, the pre-eminence of the concept of war as the principal organizing force in most societies has been insufficiently appreciated."

The Special Study Group then goes on to show how war, or the threat of war, is very "positive" from government's perspective because it allows for major expenditures, national solidarity, and a "stable internal political structure."

They state, "Without it [war], no government has ever been able to obtain acquiescence in its 'legitimacy,' or right to rule its society."

 They further state, "Obviously, if the war system were to be discarded,

new political machinery would be needed at once to serve this vital sub-function.

 Until it is developed, the continuance of the war system must be assured, if for no other reason, among others, than to preserve whatever quality and degree of poverty a society requires as an incentive, as well as to maintain the stability of its internal organization of power."

After exploring a whole range of "substitute" possibilities, such as a war on poverty, space research, even "the credibility of an out-of- our-world invasion threat," the Special Study Group reports and Doe recites." It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species. Poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power. But from present indications it will be a generation to a generation- and-a-half before environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis for a solution."

I hope you didn't skim over the preceding paragraph. It explains, with almost unbelievable boldness, that environmental concerns were an almost perfect replacement for war, but it would take a generation or a generation-and-a-half (that is, 20 to 30 years) to bring this about. Remember, we are talking about a report circa 1967.

The time frame is now complete, as evidenced by an article in the March 20, 1990, Seattle Post-Intelligencer. The front-page headline says, "Pollution a 'ticking time bomb,' conference warned." Datelined Vancouver, B.C., the lead paragraph read, "Environmental destruction is a 'ticking time bomb' that poses a 'more absolute' threat to human survival than nuclear annihilation during the Cold War, former Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland told an international environment conference here."

The article goes on, "The conference, Globe '90, was launched yesterday amid warnings that pollution and overpopulation are threats that require resources previously committed to the arms race."

I'll have more to say about Globe '90 and other such conferences later. Now let's continue with Report From Iron Mountain and its revelations.

In the section, "Substitutes for the Functions of War," they conclude:

    "However unlikely some of the possible alternate enemies we have mentioned may seem, we must emphasize that one must be found, of credible quality and magnitude, if a transition to peace is ever to come about without social disintegration."

Then they say, "It is more probable, in our judgment, that such a threat will have to be invented, rather than developed from unknown conditions." [The emphasis is definitely mine.]

[bagelboy]

First they said we would run out of oil in 20 years, well now we have more than we could have imagined.  Then they told us plastic bags would save the trees, and now they want you to use paper bags. I'm tired of all these doomsayers.  If they just had accepted nuclear energy,  we probably would not have to worry about global warming.

[Jess from VA]

Thermonuclear war might have warmed things up (and screwed things up).

Probably the biggest surprise in 80 years is that humans didn't actually light the world up with them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snTaSJk0n_Y

[98valk]

Thermonuclear war might have warmed things up (and screwed things up).

Probably the biggest surprise in 80 years is that humans didn't actually light the world up with them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snTaSJk0n_Y

“And the atmosphere was pushed apart like a scroll when it is rolled together” (Revelation 6:14). Do you know what happens in a nuclear explosion? The atmosphere rolls back on itself! It’s this tremendous rush of air back into the vacuum that causes much of the destruction of a nuclear explosion.

https://www.christianevidence.net/2017/09/john-series-of-visions-which-described_25.html

[G-Man]

And the solution for the Left and Progressives is ALWAYS the same......

Tax the middle class, over-regulate business, and the redistribution of American wealth out of the country.

[Robert]

First they said we would run out of oil in 20 years, well now we have more than we could have imagined.  Then they told us plastic bags would save the trees, and now they want you to use paper bags. I'm tired of all these doomsayers.  If they just had accepted nuclear energy,  we probably would not have to worry about global warming.

 

Thanks for the laugh, on the first part of your statement, I always think the same thing and they want us to trust them. Remember when the ozone was the real problem and it was allowing warming, and increase of cancers and now the hole has been repaired and its better than before.

But as for nuclear energy can you say Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, Chernobyl disaster, a promise of a new power source all of them promised not to happen, all did happen and the real problem how to dispose of nuclear waste. Man has not learned to deal with the problems of nuclear power production and the possibilities of problems can lay waste to our world just as a nuclear explosion would. 

An easier and cheaper and more environmentally safe way to power turbines is geo thermal and is being developed now.


The Age of Humans
The Ozone Hole Was Super Scary, So What Happened To It?
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ozone-hole-was-super-scary-what-happened-it-180957775/

[phideux]

First they said we would run out of oil in 20 years, well now we have more than we could have imagined.  Then they told us plastic bags would save the trees, and now they want you to use paper bags. I'm tired of all these doomsayers.  If they just had accepted nuclear energy,  we probably would not have to worry about global warming.

Hell, they also said New York and most of the East coast would be underwater by the year 2000 due to the Ice Caps melting. Now the ice caps are thicker than have been in centuries.

[carolinarider09]

But as for nuclear energy can you say Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, Chernobyl disaster, a promise of a new power source all of them promised not to happen, all did happen and the real problem how to dispose of nuclear waste. Man has not learned to deal with the problems of nuclear power production and the possibilities of problems can lay waste to our world just as a nuclear explosion would. 

An easier and cheaper and more environmentally safe way to power turbines is geo thermal and is being developed now.


The Age of Humans
The Ozone Hole Was Super Scary, So What Happened To It?
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ozone-hole-was-super-scary-what-happened-it-180957775/

I apologize for the long post.  But it is required giving the information "presented" in some posts above.

One must understand the design and processes used for production of electricity using nuclear power to comment on it in proper context.

Chernobyl was a poorly designed plant.  The accident was a result of flawed reactor design that was operated with inadequately trained personnel.  The design is not used by any other nation.  The accident was the direct result of a "test"

Read more here if you are interested.  Especially read about the "test" they were preforming.  

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/chernobyl-accident.aspx

Fukushima Daiichi was the result of a Tsunami that affected the safety systems.  Maybe it was poorly sited I cannot speak to that but I can say there have been no deaths or cases of radiation sickness from Fukushima Daichi nuclear accident.

Read more here is you are interested

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-daiichi-accident.aspx

Now for nuclear power in the rest of the world.  In the US, commercial nuclear power plants are either GE BWRs (Boiling Water Reactors) or PWRs (Pressurized Water Reactors) designed by Westinghouse, Babcock and Wilcox, or Combustion Engineering.  France gets 80% of its electricity from Nuclear Energy.  In the US about 10% comes from nuclear.  

The use of nuclear fuel for the generation of electric has been meet with extreme resistance from environmental groups  and the media.  But just for the record which is the safest way to produce electricity? The answer is Nuclear with next being gas, and then oil and then coal.

Using nuclear for the generation of electircyt is the safest, and if you include the entire supply chain, the most economical way to produce electricity, second only to Hydro-electric (in Mils per KW).  

Read more here if you are interested.

Death rates from air pollution and accidents related to energy production, measured in deaths per terawatt hours (TWh)

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa_08_04.html

Waste disposal is not an issue for nuclear power production.  It is made one by those against using nuclear energy for the production of electricity.  You will get more exposure to radiation if you fly (average whole body exposure of about 35 Mrem per flight).  You will be exposed to radiation each time you get a dental X-ray (the "tube" is aimed at your face which includes one of the most sensitive organs to exposure the lens of your eye).  You will be exposed to radiation (above background) if you have a granite counter top in your home.

Geo-thermal is not an answer.  See here for why not.

https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/Disadvantages_GeothermalEnergy.php

Just for the record, my experience:  I have worked for 40 plus years in the electric generation industry.  Prior to the I was in the US Navy (SSBN-599 Blue).  I worked for and earned two licenses for the operation of commercial nuclear power plants.  Both licenses issued by the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) at the Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) level.  These licenses required both a written test and an oral exam followed by a plant walk down with the NRC Inspector.  The SRO on duty is the one in charge of the operation of the commercial nuclear power plant.  

Regarding safety.  Safety at a commercial nuclear power plant is "Job One".  We think, act, and operate with safety being paramount.  It all starts with the little things.  Using the hand rail when climbing or descending stairs.  Using the same "Three Point" contact when climbing a ladder.  It begins there and extends to communications.  The use of three way communication each and every time.  

If you want to know what that really is, look here.

https://www.safetytalkideas.com/safetytalks/three-way-communication/

Summary:  Nuclear power is the safest, most cost effective way to produce the electricity we need to exist as we do today.

[F6Dave]

Summary:  Nuclear power is the safest, most cost effective way to produce the electricity we need to exist as we do today.

I agree completely.  I'd like to see the US use more of it, like France, or even Sweden which I believe produces something like 40% of its electricity with nuclear plants.

I say that even though I work in the Oil and Gas industry.  These products have their place too, especially in transportation where their high energy density, safety, and portability are an advantage.

We should never take reliable and affordable energy for granted.  Without it civilization would devolve into chaos in days.  It could be like the Mad Max movies!

[Alpha Dog]

I hear about how generation 4 nuclear power could be the answer, I know China is going full boar, and most countries are serious about it.  I have read some articles, but the technical aspects of it are above me. 

I heard a noted weather professional, it may have been Joe Bistardi of Weather Bell, talk about how optimum C0 2 levels are at 1500 ppm instead of 400 we are now at.  This is optimum for plant growth.  Also the easiest and cheapest way to scrub CO 2 is to plant trees all over.  The corn belt in the Midwest during growing season provides more oxygen than does the Amazon Rainforest.

[hubcapsc]

I hear about how generation 4 nuclear power could be the answer, I know China is going full boar, and most countries are serious about it.  I have read some articles, but the technical aspects of it are above me. 

Me too... except at the most basic level: if a "molten-salt reactor" were to be used in
4th gen power generation, the stuff gathered together for the critical mass
is liquid. If something goes wrong and the critical mass overheats, it melts a plug out of
the bottom and the critical mass runs off into a containment area where it is no longer
confined into a critical mass... a kind of failsafe...

-Mike

[Newstart2k]

Specifically for carolinarider09 (even if you were a boomer rider) but any thoughts are welcome.

What do you think of this small, unheralded bit of information?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2019/10/30/a-breakthrough-in-american-energy-dominance-us-navy-patents-compact-fusion-reactor/#6fd9c8210701

[Alien]

Ok.  First, I am not arguing that humanity is to blame for climate shifts.  I am arguing, however, that the climate and weather patterns ARE changing.  In my own home town, it was over 80 degrees yesterday.  In mid November.  When I was a kid, November was cold and rainy. 

I have spent 20 years in Emergency Management and we have seen a notable increase in the frequency and severity of natural disasters. 

I have no real opinion as to the cause of these changes.  My job is simply to prepare for and respond to the disasters.

But don't for a second become so involved with the arguments about why these changes are occurring that you stop accepting the fact that changes are taking place.

Ride Safe,

Alien

Changes have been taking place since the day this planet was formed.

 

20 years is so minute compared to the life of this planet.

Show me the weather records from 5,000 : 50,000 : 500,000 : 5,000,000 years ago.

20 years is so insignificant it's laughable.

Do you honestly think that we humans could F it up in 20 years???

Read the first sentence of my post again.  I am not theorizing who or what has caused a change.  I am simply noting that over my lifetime there HAS BEEN a change in weather patterns in the area in which I live and that there HAS BEEN an overall increase in in the frequency and severity of weather related natural disasters globally during the span of my career.

Ride Safe,

Alien

[98valk]

Ok.  First, I am not arguing that humanity is to blame for climate shifts.  I am arguing, however, that the climate and weather patterns ARE changing.  In my own home town, it was over 80 degrees yesterday.  In mid November.  When I was a kid, November was cold and rainy. 

I have spent 20 years in Emergency Management and we have seen a notable increase in the frequency and severity of natural disasters. 

I have no real opinion as to the cause of these changes.  My job is simply to prepare for and respond to the disasters.

But don't for a second become so involved with the arguments about why these changes are occurring that you stop accepting the fact that changes are taking place.

Ride Safe,

Alien

Changes have been taking place since the day this planet was formed.

 

20 years is so minute compared to the life of this planet.

Show me the weather records from 5,000 : 50,000 : 500,000 : 5,000,000 years ago.

20 years is so insignificant it's laughable.

Do you honestly think that we humans could F it up in 20 years???

Read the first sentence of my post again.  I am not theorizing who or what has caused a change.  I am simply noting that over my lifetime there HAS BEEN a change in weather patterns in the area in which I live and that there HAS BEEN an overall increase in in the frequency and severity of weather related natural disasters globally during the span of my career.

Ride Safe,

Alien

its all about the sun. we have entered a mini-ice age right now and unusual weather due to the cold sun aka Grand Solar minimum and increased cosmic rays hitting the earth.

https://abruptearthchanges.com/2018/01/14/climate-change-grand-solar-minimum-and-cosmic-rays/


https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-08-30-nasa-admits-climate-change-not-caused-by-suvs-fossil-fuels.html

https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-07-12-climate-change-hoax-collapses-new-science-cloud-cover.html

[Alpha Dog]

I hear about how generation 4 nuclear power could be the answer, I know China is going full boar, and most countries are serious about it.  I have read some articles, but the technical aspects of it are above me. 

Me too... except at the most basic level: if a "molten-salt reactor" were to be used in
4th gen power generation, the stuff gathered together for the critical mass
is liquid. If something goes wrong and the critical mass overheats, it melts a plug out of
the bottom and the critical mass runs off into a containment area where it is no longer
confined into a critical mass... a kind of failsafe...

-Mike

Thanks for that Mike.  A fail safe in Nuclear Power would be fantastic.

[tonybluegoat]

I had to look at all of that for my area. I bought a "homestead" in East Texas. Climate change here is entirely different than California. So many people want to get into the politics of it. I ignore politics. Here's what I found for my area:

https://tonybluegoat.blogspot.com/2015/12/climate-change-in-east-texas.html

This entry has some maps you may be interested in regarding water and temperature changes in California. There's also a good book that I read called "The West Without Water" I got it on Audible.  Fascinating stuff, and really well documented. California (particularly Southern and Interior) are going to be really hard hit.  The other big area that is being overlooked, in my opinion, is the Ogallala Aquifer that runs up the farmland. The big irrigation wells are running dry in some areas about as fast as they can install them. 10 years is a heartbeat to these aquifers and they are going dry fast.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2016/08/vanishing-midwest-ogallala-aquifer-drought/#close

Southern California aquifers are really getting hit hard. The "good news" for water at least is that the U.S. population is stagnating quickly and will start shrinking in the next generation or two.  So lots of the predictions about overpopulation have proven to be unfounded. The best book for this is: "Empty Planet: Global Population Decline"

The other area that matters is fossil fuel energy use. I've been following oil since 2006. The biggest shift coming in the next 5 years (10 at the most) is the death of fracking, mostly because it costs more than it's worth at any oil price. The money has started drying up this year and that industry will be busted around 2022 when the big bonds will go south. I have only started looking at the ramifications, but natural gas is going to be decimated. Over 60% of our natural gas and 50% of U.S. oil comes from fracking. It's already shutting down in a big way, not because of lack of oil under the ground but because it's unprofitable to get it out.  Solar/wind will be where the new bubble money goes, based on what I've seen so far. So the U.S. is going to get more energy efficient over the coming decades.  (again, people who want to put politics into everything would disagree.... I don't care about politics on either side. ) And MIT team did an amazing job creating "Liquid Metal Batteries." These are container sized batteries that don't degrade over time like Lithium, use standard and readily available resources, and can store Utility Level power.  They are still working on getting the seals to last for decades, but they are close. This will be a game changer when it comes to utility sized renewable.

It's all interesting to watch. But the trends are toward declining population, massive energy shifts away from fossil fuels and real water problems in the crop growing regions of America. Luckily there are solutions already in the works. Some large farms are turning to what is called "regenerative farming" which is a particular style of cover cropping, reducing fertilizing by 75% or more, and implementing no irrigation.  It's as effective as high intensity farming, even on industrial scales. It will be interesting to watch. So the world isn't coming to an end, just in transition.


Tony

[Oss]

If we have to store the nuclear waste for 10000 yrs how can we say today that it will be safe then?

That is like playing russian roulette isn't it or saying you can guaranty an answer to a problem with 3 variables knowing just 1 and add hundreds of centuries to the last variable?

Oss

Living for 35 years just 11 miles from Indian Point (3 nuclear reactors only 2 working today)  Yeah and I had ALL of the free booklets from U.S. AEC back in the day
Probably still on some watch list

[0leman]

Not sure any of us has the answer to the "Global Warming" or what ever the catch phrase is now.  There are climate scientist on both sides saying different things. Media seems to only listen to and report what the "Alarmist" side says as it is gloom and doom.  Media likes that.  Seems that the Alarmist side doesn't want to debate the other side on the issues.

Just because someone creates a computer program that shows runaway warming in 80-90 years from now doesn't make it right.   that program should show what is happening in the present, it doesn't.  Seems the average of all these programs is about twice what is happening in the real world. 

As far as weather related monetary disasters as related to what has gone on 20-50 years ago.  there is more building going on in the areas that are being hit by these storms.  50 years ago when I live in OK, lots of tornadoes were happening.  But not much monetary lost because there were less folks living in the paths of these storms.  Also there were a lot of the smaller tornadoes that were never seen/recorded because we didn't have the technology to see them.  This is true of a lot of hurricanes.  Now we have the technology to see them form and move around like never before.   As far as numbers of hurricanes increasing, we went thru nearly a 20 year drought of class 3 or bigger hurricanes hitting the US mainland which ended a couple years ago.

Also one should keep in mind two things when talking about  Global Warming, one is that we are still coming out of a Little Ice Age (which ended according to some in 1850).  Temps have been naturally warming up since then, no help from humans   Two What is the best Global temp for humans.   Never have heard any one say.

 

[..]

Read a news article the other day that the Alarmists have been talking with marketing and focus groups to find a new term to scare people.

"Climate Disaster" is one term.

Don't be surprised to see the media flip to a new description in the very near future.

[98valk]

Read a news article the other day that the Alarmists have been talking with marketing and focus groups to find a new term to scare people.

"Climate Disaster" is one term.

Don't be surprised to see the media flip to a new description in the very near future.

and UN globalists are behind it all. they put out a call a few yrs ago to hollywood to put it into their movies since the cartoons that were impresseed on children's minds who now are in their late teens and 20s wasn't enough.

[Jess from VA]

The global warming/climate change agenda (not to be confused with good work on curbing environmental pollution everywhere reasonably possible) is one of those top-down plans that taxes everyone (and business), enriches and empowers government, increases government control of everyone (and business), makes the grand socialization process easier over time, decreases personal liberty, leading to one world order.

Not exactly the same, but very similar to universal G health care/insurance (which managed to creep into so much more than just health care). 

[tonybluegoat]

The global warming/climate change agenda (not to be confused with good work on curbing environmental pollution everywhere reasonably possible) is one of those top-down plans that taxes everyone (and business), enriches and empowers government, increases government control of everyone (and business), makes the grand socialization process easier over time, decreases personal liberty, leading to one world order.

Not exactly the same, but very similar to universal G health care/insurance (which managed to creep into so much more than just health care).  

This is why I learned years ago to ignore politics and weather.  In my 30's I was actually very involved.  I was even an in-studio guest on conservative talk radio. I was last interviewed by TV when Trump was campaigning.

The more involved I got the more I learned how joyfully manipulative political marketers are. The big lie on the liberal side is that they can actually solve these problems. Global warming, poverty, prejudice, violence, crime.... They gleefully manipulate people into voting for them because they will "do something!"  The lie on the conservative side is that you aren't already 100% a drone. You are already 100% controlled by the monetary system.  It replaced military control, religious control and government control long ago. So they create all these straw enemies while they laugh and know that the real control is the money. "One World Order" is the Conservative version of "Carbon Emissions." If you think you have liberty stop making money and see how free you are.

But that's just me. Yes Global climate change is real.  You can't take 600,000 years of carbon sequestration in the form of natural gas and oil and release it into the atmosphere in a 100 year time span. No, there's nothing that can be done about it. If all human died and we stopped burning fossil fuels today it would take 150,000 years to get back to pre-industrial levels. We're not going to do that.  All the fossil fuels will be burned. The temp will rise 4 degrees C. Whatever that means we shall see. Politics has nothing to do with that.

Fill a tub to the top with water then get in it. The liberals will say they can stop the flood. The conservatives will pray for dry feet and declare themselves "free to bath how they see fit". The government will pass a law against filling a bath tub past the newly designated "top fill line." The lawyers will sue the tub maker. The utility will raise the water rates. Everyone fills their role. The great news, if you believe in "freedom" is that they all are doing it for their own petty, personal, irrational, consumerist, power hungry, reasons. So they are all the same. (wait... what was the question... does it matter when you bring politics into it?.. no)

[0leman]

But that's just me. Yes Global climate change is real.  You can't take 600,000 years of carbon sequestration in the form of natural gas and oil and release it into the atmosphere in a 100 year time span. No, there's nothing that can be done about it. If all human died and we stopped burning fossil fuels today it would take 150,000 years to get back to pre-industrial levels. We're not going to do that.  All the fossil fuels will be burned. The temp will rise 4 degrees C. Whatever that means we shall see. Politics has nothing to do with that.

Tony, the amount of CO2 humans are putting into the atmosphere is very small compared to what nature has and continues contribute.   We are responsible to 4% or less of what is out there.  Look it up.  CO2 is less than one percent of the gasses in the Atmosphere.   Also during the warmer periods of this earth the CO2 was 2000 ppm or more.  That is nearly 5 times what it is now.  According those who know life on the planted would stop if CO2 gets below 150 ppm.   In fact according to gov experts that planted has Greened up a bit since the CO2 levels have gotten close to the 400 ppm levels.  This has been shown with satellite photos.   No our planted is not going to warm up 4 degrees C in the next 80 years.   

[tonybluegoat]

But that's just me. Yes Global climate change is real.  You can't take 600,000 years of carbon sequestration in the form of natural gas and oil and release it into the atmosphere in a 100 year time span. No, there's nothing that can be done about it. If all human died and we stopped burning fossil fuels today it would take 150,000 years to get back to pre-industrial levels. We're not going to do that.  All the fossil fuels will be burned. The temp will rise 4 degrees C. Whatever that means we shall see. Politics has nothing to do with that.

Tony, the amount of CO2 humans are putting into the atmosphere is very small compared to what nature has and continues contribute.   We are responsible to 4% or less of what is out there.  Look it up.  CO2 is less than one percent of the gasses in the Atmosphere.   Also during the warmer periods of this earth the CO2 was 2000 ppm or more.  That is nearly 5 times what it is now.  According those who know life on the planted would stop if CO2 gets below 150 ppm.   In fact according to gov experts that planted has Greened up a bit since the CO2 levels have gotten close to the 400 ppm levels.  This has been shown with satellite photos.   No our planted is not going to warm up 4 degrees C in the next 80 years.  

Cite your source, and tell that to Miami who has sea water coming up into the streets from their storm drains. The reality of what is happening is real... the politics of what's happening is pretend.  In Miami they don't care about politics, they need to install pumps and raise roads.

Here are mine:
The West Without Water - Ingram, et al.
The Crash Course... - Martenson
The Race for What's Left - Klare
Currency Wars - Rickards
Reinventing Collapse - Orlov
Eight Pieces of Empire - Sheets
The Party's Over - Heinberg
America: The Farewell Tour - Hedges
Empty Planet - Bricker, et al
The Human Tide - Moreland
Collusions: How Central Bankers Rigged the World - Prins
Saudi America - McLean
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire - Gibbon
Homo Deus -Harari
the first 7 volumes on world history by Will Durant
(etc.)


I've also read:
The Liberty Amendments - Levine
The Heritage Guide to the Constitution - Meese, et al
Liberty Defined - Paul
Money and Power - Cohan
(etc)

Add to that sources that some would disagree with like:
The USGS, Oil and Gas Forecast 2050, Shell's Oil and Gas Scenarios for the next 50 years, actual scientific reports

The complexities involved and the interactions between money, energy, environment, economies, global trade, etc. are basically infinite..... and there is ZERO chance of CO2 or Climate or "The Environment" or anything other than money to dictate any of it.... so regardless of arguments you don't need to worry about anything getting the way of you doing whatever you want... however, people who argue against climate change are the most under-educated on the subject.  They take supposedly useful facts like "CO2 makes up less than 1% of the atmosphere" to try to make points that are based on nothing other than personal and political opinions. The conservative argument is simple.... EVERYONE who has looked at this issue seriously and professionally is lying, and the 3 kooks who are on talk radio are right. The thousands upon thousands of field scientists who are taking the measurements, and the hundreds of professional environmental experts who model are stupid dupes of Al Gore. I have been in the building during a Trump Rally where people chant "USA USA USA" when he talks about dumping the Kyoto Protocol... like one thing has anything to do with the other.

Politicians make up less than 1% of the U.S. "environment" yet they have poisoned every single molecule of it. 99% of any news story ends with an argument over "politics" "policy" "government" and "Trump". If you are over 30 you can probably remember a time when nobody gave a crap about politics. It was a much better world. My real point is that politicians and the press make these thing into moral arguments that make people think that it matters when it doesn't because whatever happens in the environment is going to happen because humans will always do what's best for their immediate gratification. And the bald manipulation of everyone on both sides by this issue... and so many others.  

Modification.... Here's what I actually want to say...

Could it be possible that both things are true.  Could it be true that the climate is getting warmer and we may want to account for that. AND It can also be true that the UN or World Peaceniks or who-ever is ALSO using that for their own agenda?  Is that possible?  Is it possible that CO2 emissions are one of the drivers of climate change AND there are other drivers, such as long term (100,000+ year) variations also apply?  Is it possible that the radical environmentalists are right about the impacts over the next 200 years AND completely wrong that there is anything what-so-ever that they or anyone else can do about it?  Could it be possible that all the facts are correct AND that the results are incorrect?  All of these things can be AND. They don't have to be OR.

Regarding "oil going away in 20 years" then "we have all the oil." Is it possible that fracking added to our production but oil will eventually go away ... 100 years?  Or will there be ever increasing amounts of oil for the entirety of human existence?  I closely track the fracking industry... so I have my opinions.

Ride on!