# Let's Banter Around Global Warming and/or pizza toppings. Rules are in paragraph 1



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Paragraph 1 - No mention of Republican or Democratic views. No mention of religion, although I'm not quite sure how that would integrate with the subject. Anyway, be nice.

Ok, let's banter. Here is something from the science section of the NY Times.

Global warming has become perhaps the most complicated issue facing world leaders. Warnings from the scientific community are becoming louder, as an increasing body of science points to rising dangers from the ongoing buildup of human-related greenhouse gases - produced mainly by the burning of fossil fuels and forests.

Global emissions of carbon dioxide jumped by the largest amount on record in 2010, upending the notion that the brief decline during the recession might persist through the recovery. Emissions rose 5.9 percent in 2010, according to the Global Carbon Project, an international collaboration of scientists. The increase solidified a trend of ever-rising emissions that scientists fear will make it difficult, if not impossible, to forestall severe climate change in coming decades.

However, the technological, economic and political issues that have to be resolved before a concerted worldwide effort to reduce emissions can begin have gotten no simpler, particularly in the face of a global economic slowdown.

I personally do not believe global warming to be a fairy tale. It should be fairly obvious to all that something significant is going on with our planet. I understand that in the very near future the government is going to change the name of Glacier National Park. I think they're going to have a contest to rename it.


----------



## trickshot (Jul 4, 2011)

My dad grew up in a town 100 miles from the Atlantic Ocean. However, as a child he collected shark teeth in a creek near his house. Where did the ocean go?

Does climate (weather) "change"? Yes. It was warmer here today than yesterday.

Does the SUN and it's solar flares effect us more than carbon dioxide? Yes.

Have they had to change the name of the catastrophe from Global Warming to Climate Change? Yes!

5 things that make me even more skeptical.

#1 The meteorologist that come up with these theories are getting grants from the government. Do you not think there's some influence there?

#2 How can a meteorologist tell me what's the weather is going to be like in a 100 years but he can't tell me if it's going to rain tomorrow?

#3 In the seventies, we were headed to Global Cooling. What happened??

#4 Al Gore left the WH worth about $1 million. He's now worth over $100 million selling snake oil.

#5 Politicians (any) involvement.


----------



## 280305 (Sep 28, 2008)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

If that's not proof of global warming then I don't know what is. Did the driver manage to escape? You must have taken the picture in Sacramento.


----------



## Howie (May 25, 2010)

@trickshot, 5 very good points.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Now you see it, now you don't. These images, captured two weeks apart by NASA's Terra satellite on 17 July (below) and 3 August, show a dramatic retreat of sea ice in the Arctic's North-West Passage.


----------



## waho6o9 (May 6, 2011)

Nonsense


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

Snow and ice melt in the summer.

I'm shocked!


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

I hope you guys don't own homes in Florida at sea level. Oh wait, all homes in Florida are at sea level. Don't say I didn't warn you. Your legacy to your grandkids will be underwater someday in the not too distant future. I can't argue with those that refuse to listen. Kind of like religion I suppose.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Nobody is saying it is not getting warmer, The debate is on ANTHROPOGENIC warming.

Facts is there was the medieval warm period.
So why was it warmer before there were cities/factories/cars/electricity generation? the population was only 10% of what it is today!

It is also true that it is warmer today than during the ice age.

What is missing is a good/defensible picture of exactly what fraction of the global warming is from human activities. I can look at the LA skys and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to say "that isn't good"

The leap I don't make is that ANY microscopic step forward, is worth an infinite amount of resources to change or implement just to say it is better.

PART of the warming trend is NATURAL… is that Part 2% or 30%? I don't know.

But if ADOPTING the draconian solutions proposed by UN panels means that the earth will warm 0.5 degree C in 30 years instead of 27 years….then we need to decide what is that 3 years worth.
It is not 3 years of life, but rather like calculating gas savings with speed limits.

I see the climate change as inevitable. Both because of natural warming, but also because India and China pollute more than the US does. and the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China)- where all the jobs are moving to, are unwilling to take part in this dialog on change.

WHy the hell are we going to spend resources on this? Just for our conciences?

SHow me that the regulation is worthwhile and actually PREVENTS anything. ANd then lets discuss a CONSENSUS approach, rather than the US sending our jobs that were done in* clean *factories here, to the third world where we will instead generate 3 times the pollution. Before someone claims to be SOLVING global warming. Again if all we are doing is delaying a small increas by a year, but spending a trillion dollars on the effort, that seems a total waste of time. 
Like saying we will drive of the cliff at 47 miles per hour instead of 50…isn't that so awesome! At the end of the day you prevented bumpkus


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Regulations, shemegulations…at this point it doesn't matter. I don't think we can turn around our polluting ways. Some of the biggest polluters don't care. I'm not saying the end of the world is coming but I am saying some pretty significant changes are.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

Imposing a scientifically enlightened, global warming, world view on the developing economies named above won't go over very well, I'm thinking. No one interfered in similar fashion in the West's Industrial Revolution, and the environmental habits from that period were finally redressed in the US with environmental regulations rooted in the 1970s. Serious issue, unclear the way forward is… (Yoda-like phrase, sorry)

Oh, and +1 to Dr. Dirt's points…


----------



## SteviePete (May 10, 2009)

This issue contains all the trappings of the Middle Ages view of a flat earth. Mix in Politics and Religion-used and misused. This topic contains so many avenues of thought, every "fact" has been turned into an is/is not statement. And of course, we all know it is impossible prove something doesn't exist.

So, I've decided to stay out of this one because as a "God fear'n hooman bean" (Pogo - 1968) I don't want to produce any more ozone depleating gas. "And that's about all I have to say about that!" (Gump, Forrest 1994 Movie)


----------



## TheOldTimer (Dec 13, 2009)

If it is not woodworking, I am not interested


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Keep this up and they'll ban science topics altogether too.

Climate and weather are two different things. Weather is immediate, climate is long term. Fluctuations in weather do not indicate changes in climate.

Here's a link to a good site discussing the common arguments against climate change (sun activity, volcanic emissions of CO2, data has been faked…) http://www.astronomynotes.com/solarsys/s11b.htm

Ken Mueller was a climate change skeptic and darling of the denialists, until he studied the evidence (with funding from the Koch brothers none the less). Here's an article he wrote for the WSJ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204422404576594872796327348.html

While much science research is funded by the government, it's not like these results started with the current administration, the trend was identified years ago and the research continues to support the theory of anthropomorphic global warming; research done in the US and other countries.

Having said that, I don't for a moment think that humans will act in our own best interest and modify our behavior to stop this, we can only hope for a technological breakthrough to reduce carbon emissions, or get ready to deal with lots of new problems.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Ultimately we will act out of preservation.

However many in the UN want to have teh USA "fall on their collective sword" for the new agenda, while the rest of the world laughs


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

Globe warming HA! Nobody really knows but it is a good tool for government to try to control us and pick our pockets. The people who study this stuff are all over the place. Some say were in the beginning stages of an ice age some not. there all over the place.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

I seem to remember about 2-3 years ago, that the summer was too cold for all those City Swimming Pools to open. In July? 70 for highs? lifeguards were being laid off? Strange that nobody had a reason for a COLD summer in Ohio….

Climate Change??? BS I say. Climate will always change, we are still warming up from the last Ice Age. In a few thousand years, we will go back down into Ice Age #5. Climate Happens, get over it…


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Smitty, the great lakes (erie in particular) are a good example of what you say. During the good times in US manufacturing everyone said nature would take care of itself and flush out all of the pollution. Well when Erie finally died they decided to do something.

Global warming is similar to evolution in that it is not easy to understand and the common, everyday citizen that is not trained to understand usually takes the path of least resistance…and don't even think about it. If you ignore it something or someone will eventually take care of it and you can then enjoy your "in the rut" life without being burdened with anything beyond "should we include black olives with the pepperoni?".


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

DKV - - the big challenge though is that Erie was both very tangible and obvious that the problem was there.

But also it was obvious who needed to change and how, in order to fix it. It was a very localized problem.

Challenge is [email protected] (if that is really the culprit) is global. So if we convert to Wind turbines, and China builds 5 megacoal plants/year… what do we accomplish?


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

DrDirt, in one of my previous posts I agree with you. At this point there is not much that can be done. Business and the rise of economies in India and China will not be stopped. If the US was on a growth path in industries that highly pollute the climate scientists would be ignored. I wish I was young enough to be around in 40-50 years to see what life on this planet will be like.


----------



## helluvawreck (Jul 21, 2010)

It's simple; the powers that be want us to go to a carbon based economy. The large bankers will run the carbon trade and it will make the derivative trade look like small potatoes. In doing so they will make a whole lot of money, gain a whole lot more power, and we will be much less free.

helluvawreck
https://woodworkingexpo.wordpress.com


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

While is may make you feel better to deny it, most climate scientists (~97%) agree on global warming; most of those who do not are not experts in the field http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.abstract

And again, weather does not equal climate. You have to look at the long term trends for climate, a cold summer does not refute global warming any more than a warm winter proves it.

Another thing to consider is who benefits from casting doubt on this? The oil, coal, and natural industries, who happen to fund much of the vocal opposition. What benefit do climate scientists gain from this? They certainly are not getting rich from this. Do you really think these guys couldn't find other research topics if global warming didn't exist; this is all they can do to earn a living?

I agree we'll have to adapt and deal with the changes. Keep your fingers crossed for technological advancement; oil from algae (ExxonMobile is working hard on that) where motor fuel can be made by algae in a basically carbon neutral cycle), improved battery technology; breakthrough in solar panel efficiency, all would help check CO2 level rise. If they can figure out how to engineer organisms that can remove carbon from the atmosphere, or an efficient way to absorb CO2 on a grand scale, we might have a chance at actually reducing levels.


----------



## helluvawreck (Jul 21, 2010)

Ho Hum,John! I'm not buying into it. I've done a little reading into it, also.

helluvawreck
https://woodworkingexpo.wordpress.com


----------



## dbhost (Jul 20, 2009)

It's threads like this that spew so much hot air that are causing climate change…


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Dbhost, have the courage to tell why you don't like it or are you just a commodian?


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

John -
Climate scientists are gaining from this. and in the Climate gate scandal we got to see how all dissenting opinion is squelched. "Even if we must redefine what peer reviewed means" Seeing these methods of driving the debate are what fuels skeptics.

In six sigma parlance, we refer to that process as "Decision based Factmaking", rather than "Fact Based Decision Making".
WHen you have a CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH CENTER, fully staffed and funded, then information that goes against the very mission of the entire organization is a realy problem.

There is evidence that data that didn't fit the CO2 model at the :

E-mail file #942777075

"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

Phil Jones (Climatic Research Unit)
University of East Anglia

Do I believe that Man is contributing to warming… yes.

Short of Soylent Green - - - can we do anything about it? Maybe, but not acting alone.

I don't think that the oil companies are that capable of controlling the global economy.
Power and influence in DC, yes…. but BP and Exxon isn't 'forcing China to do squat'


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

...
proof of global warming ! Thanks Chuckman!

Finally a forum topic to *favorite* ! With the changes to the off-topic directory, I was beginning to loose interest…<grinz>


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Dirt - The whole 'climate gate' issue was investigated multiple times and it was much ado about nothing, especially the email you quoted. The term 'trick' was used in much the same way we use it in this website; 'I found a great trick for doing something', not in the sense of 'I'm going to trick someone.'

The oil companies don't have to control the global economy, just sow confusion and promote denial; much the same way the tobacco companies did about lung cancer. [Just for perspective, I'm not anti-oil, I worked in refining for 20 years] It's easy to do when people would rather not listen to the science in the first place.

I think you and I are on the same page actually, at least when it comes to the net effect. I agree the USA isn't going to address this ourselves, even if we got a majority of our citizens to recognize the problem and agree to act, it will take a global response, and that just will not happen. Like I said in previous posts, I see technology as our only hope; either that or things will get ugly and expensive in the future.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

True John -
I just wish the Alarmists would step aside and actually have a rational discussion that says "here is the path" 
Here is what happens if we do nothing
Here is how that changes if we do X versus Y versus Z

Everyone is looking at these carbon credit schemes that I think make derivatives look like a church bake sale.

Everyone promoting the theory - seems to just say "we should do this because it is good". I want to know how good, how expensive, and actually debate the consequences if we go it alone, which to me seems to be the path our EPA and DOE are on. Maybe the concepts are the right thing to do - but if we are on our own, it is just stupid and shortsighted.

As far as the East Anglican E-mails - - - they were said to be 'Nothing' by the other climate researchers. There was no impartial review. the word TRICK was not the discussion point, like your sharpening point.

If I say I am using a TRICK to *HIDE THE DECLINE *in temperature…. then I have identified that I have done something to make the data *indicate something untrue*. The temperature was dropping , and they applied this TRICK to HIDE that so they could still say the temperature is Rising when it was actually falling. AGAIN - - Decision based Factmaking, and just discarding what doesn't fit, rather than refine our model to fit what is happening to keep the dollars flowing into the research center.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Dirt - there were two US and three UK investigation on 'climategate' and they all found nothing.

I do agree carbon taxes are difficult to implement, and pointless if it's only the US doing it. I further agree that a rational discussion of the costs and effects would be far more productive than the current bickering, but that's true for so much these days.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Agree John - - wish that people that ask questions wouldn't be deemed 'Flat earthers' for not just buying in at face value.

The UK investigation according to the Telegraph..
"Norfolk Constabulary continues its investigations into criminal offences in relation to a data breach at the University of East Anglia. During the enquiry officers have been working in liaison with the Office of the Information Commissioner and with *officers from the National Domestic Extremism Team*. The UEA continues to co-operate with the enquiry however major investigations of this nature are of necessity very detailed and as a consequence can take time to reach a conclusion. It would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage."
So the National Domestic Extremism team said "nothing to see here keep moving!"

These fuel the deniers.


----------



## trickshot (Jul 4, 2011)

This hysteria is created for two reasons. Control and Money!!

The $100 million man: AL GORE'S GLOBAL WARMING DEBUNKED - BY KIDS! http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/62598/

A child made this video: 




1977!!! What??


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, ad infinitum. I have just this one question. Why do all of the climate scientists agree concerning climate change and it is happening? Are they all crazy and publicity seekers?

BTW, don't say anything to JimC about climate change or global warming. He could care less.


----------



## chrisstef (Mar 3, 2010)

they see me trollin … they hatin


----------



## trickshot (Jul 4, 2011)

DKV - I think you must understand that scientist are able to study threories, cures, etc. based on grants that are giving to them. Some are government grants and some are private. So there's 2 things going on here.

#1 If something doesn't exist, you can't study it and if you can't study it, you don't have a job.

#2 The group giving the money is probably hoping for a certain outcome.

Here's another article from the WSJ about more scientist speaking up about the nonsense of GW.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html

"Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet. Lysenko and his team lived very well, and they fiercely defended their dogma and the privileges it brought them."

They're selling snake oil!!


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Ok, ok, ok. Global warming is not happening. You all convinced me. Now, would you like black olives with that pepperoni?


----------



## mark88 (Jun 8, 2009)

i dont kknow if uve noticed but…new rules have been made dkv…not to stir the pot but…

Non-shop Talk

In order to keep the Projects, Blogs and Forums as "woodworking-related only" as well as to provide a place for members to socialize about things other than woodworking, we have introduced a "Non-shop Talk" section, located here.
The rules are the same as above. The "Non-shop Talk", although not about woodworking, is still a component of the site and the same rules and expectations apply. "Play nice" sums it up nicely.
Because of their divisive nature, political and religious debates, and thus postings, are prohibited at LumberJocks.com. Please refrain from starting or taking part in such discussions.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Mark, what the hell are you talking about? You lost me in your first sentence.


----------



## mark88 (Jun 8, 2009)

nevermind im out


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

DKV - the challenge is that a climate researcher that sees a problem with the model is treated like Coppernicus and Galileo trying to convince the religeous establishment about a heliocentric solar system.

We have these entire industries built up, with multiple centers, carbon trading and such…It is nearly impossible to change that.

In short once climate became a global POLITICAL activity, rather than a scientific one….it has "set itself back" creating critics (more accurately cynics) who see activities aimed to curb our influences, as UN meddling in some globalized "spread the wealth scheme"

What if this papers findings are accurate??
Abstract of their paper.
The severity of damaging human-induced climate change depends not only on the magnitude of the change but also on the potential for irreversibility. This paper shows that the climate change that takes place due to increases in carbon dioxide concentration is largely irreversible for 1,000 years after emissions stop. Following cessation of emissions, removal of atmospheric carbon dioxide decreases radiative forcing, but is largely compensated by slower loss of heat to the ocean, *so that atmospheric temperatures do not drop significantly for at least 1,000 years*.

So all of our activities to solve global warmeing cannot reverse CO2 impacts for a thousand years? That shouldn't be a reason to do nothing… but does bring to question what our course of action should be, and what effect we expect to see from moving away from a carbon energy economy.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Dr, if you hadn't noticed I am taking the "black olive with the pepperoni" approach now. Way too many "head in the sand" people on this site to make the discussion even half interesting. BTW, I love your signature. It should be the official signature of this site…sadly though there are too many people that absolutely know what is right and wrong and then feel the need to apply "their right and wrong" to the rest of us. They think it's for our own good. Anyway, would you like black olives with the pepperoni?


----------



## RetiredCoastie (Sep 7, 2009)

If you feel that way why do you continue to post your BS on this site other than to create arguments that didn't exist before and stretch the boundaries of this forum. I would think your time would be better served by posting on sites that are dedicated to the topics you wish to participate in and not be bothered with as you put it:

"Way too many "head in the sand" people on this site to make the discussion even half interesting".


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

_sadly though there are too many people that absolutely know what is right and wrong and then feel the need to apply "their right and wrong" to the rest of us. They think it's for our own good._

Pot, meet kettle.


----------



## waho6o9 (May 6, 2011)

Utter nonsense


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

RetireCoastie, just a couple comments:
1. I like interesting, thought filled topics with people that have opinions that are not necessarily inline with mine.
2. I have not started a political or religious topic since the ban started. Not even close to either forbidden fruit.
3. You only feel that my "BS" topics cause arguments because you don't agree and folks should agree with you.
4. What are your thoughts on global warming? Why can't you give your thoughts without complaining…or not?
5. BTW, were you ever stationed in Astoria? Oregon that is.
I lied, that was more than a couple…


----------



## RetiredCoastie (Sep 7, 2009)

Yes I was stationed in Astoria.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

My hometown from 4th grade to the draft. Did you like it? Lot's of rain. When were you there?


----------



## RetiredCoastie (Sep 7, 2009)

It's a small world! I liked the area but when I lived there the area was very depressed and yes lots of rain. I went back up to Alaska which I really loved.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Astoria thrived before the fish were fished out and the lumber was lumbered out. Now they rely on tourists and the occasional cruise ship. Kind of like a third world country depending on others to survive. Also, I agree it's a small world. Met an LJ the other day that was from the same small Minnesota town as I was. Oh well…


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

DKV - - No I don't like cooked olives. I like black olives on an Italian Sub at ye ol Subway.

I''ll not pick them off a Pizza, but i would not chose to put them on if i were making it.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

I'll take the Black Olives, the Green Olives, and the Banana peppers, thank you. Plenty of all the meats in the arsenal, including the Bacon. Double load of cheese, above and below the rest of the toppings. Add a pitcher of cold beer, I'm set for the night….


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Wow, you guys just gave me an idea for a nonshop topic. "What do you like on your pizza?". Of course one of you guys would have to post it. Everyone would think I'm somehow trying to connect pizza to religion or politics. Now, if we were talking cigars then they might be right. However, we're not. Anyone volunteer to start the pizza thread? I've got an idea. I will modify the thread title.


----------



## CplSteel (Jun 22, 2012)

Well i don't know enough about food science to look at all the research and weigh in on the pepperoni v black olive debate, however…

If a bunch of food scientists that got noble prizes and are well respected in the industry say black olives on a pizza will eventually destroy my house if I don't stop eating them, then I will just go with pepperoni. If we do what they say and they are wrong, sure I paid a bit more for pizza, maybe a lot more, but that is the extent of the harm. If they are right and I ignore them and the black olives ruin my house then it is a major bummer, and if they are right it will mean no more pizza for my grandkids then I don't think the black olives are worth it just to save a few bucks on a pizza.

Did that run afoul of the rules?


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Don't worry your little heart. There are lots of LJs out there just waiting for us to skirt the rules. Nathen has probably received a few flags to investigate by now. Oh well, if we do bad then someone will tell us that we did bad. Sometimes bad is good and good is bad. Wow, another topic! Good, bad, bad good…I like it. What ever happened to just having some good old fun? There's another topic. Are you for or against fun?


----------



## AKSteve (Feb 4, 2012)

Okay I am not smart enough to know that GW was caused by man, but I am smart enough to know that if we implement ways of dealing with it , it's a win, win situation. Okay what if it's not real, well guess what we have more clean air and clean water, less pollution and less Cancer! then Okay what if it's real, the same thing applies. it's better to something than nothing at all.

I want anchovies on my pizza ! yummy.

oh an Astoria very cool place used to go there alot! I live along the Columbia, In Washougal, WA before I move up here.


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

Follow the money. Climate scientist work off of government grand. If the don't find man made
problems the get no more money.


----------



## larajones3k3 (Aug 16, 2012)

Global warming is a fact, and its coming


----------



## waho6o9 (May 6, 2011)

Climate scientist. LOL, watch your wallet.

+100 for AlaskaGuy


----------



## dbhost (Jul 20, 2009)

DKV,

Discussions about topics such as this are heavily vested in misinformation coming from all directions. IF climate change is taking place, proponents of the theory of climate change have utilized such deceitful tactics to manipulate the data and public opinion that their input can no longer be trusted. Likewise those that argue AGAINST climate change have engaged in deceit and misinformation at a wholesale level as well.

Combine that with the fact that this is wrapped up in the slimy rotting garbage on a hot sunny day stench that is politics, and for the most part, the general public just wants the problem to go the heck away.

To boil it down to basics we have two opposing, and obnoxious opposites at work around us…

Extreme #1. Those that say the whole world will go to hell in a handbasket unless we all go back to living in the jungle eating nuts and berries and being one with mother earth. The drop dead date for everything going to hell in a handbasket as I recall was sometime in the 1970s, then 1980s, then 1990s, then… oh you get the idea… These same people feel a need to save us from ourselves by making us buy new light bulbs that won't fit in our old fixtures, we can't fix our old toilets we have to buy new ones that won't flush, and you will be chastised by Barbara Streisand if you drive an SUV, or minivan to haul your family around, or a pickup truck to haul materials and finished goods to and fro. Never mind the Barbara Streisand, and Will I Am types show up to Earth Day and similar events in giant carbon sucking Caddilac Escalades and Sekorsky helicopters… (Do as the elites say not as they do).

Extreme #2. Nothing man does can add up to be bad for the overall environment, so no matter what we do it's all good. Let the giant corporations, unions and governments off of any sort of responsibility for what they do that causes harm to the innocents in the environment around them. And never mind that they know how to safely make things such as much more efficient automobiles that people will actually want to buy, those business arrangements with big oil and the like can't be minimized.

And the useful idiots are out there by legions swearing that the end is nigh, or full speed ahead nothing to see here.

All the while these "debates" that only seem to really benefit the elites in society go on, it's the working and middle classes that are getting "attached to another object by an incline plane wrapped helically around an axis".

To be blunt, we are *#$% sick of it. The world isn't going to come to an end if the jerk down the street wants to drive a Hummer and flush a 3 gallon toilet. By the same token. Why for example can't I buy a new F-150 with a MUCH more efficient 4 or 6 cylinder Diesel engine that would deliver easily 50% better fuel economy than my current gas engine model, with similar performance characteristics? And why can't anyone seem to make a low flow toilet that actually works? How is it that reducing hydrocarbon emissions by using more flourescent lighting is good, but putting all that mercury in those bulbs eventually into a landfill, and in turn into the soil and water, or into the atmosphere is absolutely ignored by the environmental types?

The politicization of a technical problem always results in bad, bad, bad results… The most frightening phrase in the English language after all is…

"I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help."


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Wow!


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Does anybody else think that population growth and Climate Change walk hand in hand?

Sorry if someone mentioned that before.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

*Does anybody else think that population growth and Climate Change walk hand in hand?*

Of course they do. Haven't you ever been in a crowded room that overwhelms the air handling unit? Do you think 500,000 of us could produce all the crap that 5,000,000,000 do?


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

_Haven't you ever been in a crowded room that overwhelms the air handling unit? Do you think 500,000 of us could produce all the crap that 5,000,000,000 do?_

Not a good comparison.

BTW, current world population is in excess of 7,000,000,000.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

err, yeah, I wasn't thinking of a crowded room. Just wanted to bring another factor into the thread that no-one thought about.
Population projection for 2050 (I know this won't bother some of you) is 9bn. That's 28.6% more than the current population in just less than 40 years. What is that going to do the planet?


----------



## dbhost (Jul 20, 2009)

That population growth is not coming from North America or Europe. It's the rest of the globe that keeps on squirting offspring out. If anything if it weren't for immigration, North America and Europe would be in a population decline.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Renners, disease, famine or war. Those are the historical solutions.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

It's not coming from China either. Only a small projected rise in the population of China in 2050 due to the one child policy, where Han Chinese in urban areas are permitted one child only. This 'temporary measure' introduced in 1979 is likely to remain indefinitely.


----------



## dbhost (Jul 20, 2009)

Famine and Disease are ongoing problems for human and non human populations… If history is any indicator, then war is what will likely reduce the ******************** sapien population down to a more politically correct, and manageable level. And judging from the overall tone of events transpiring, we are overdue, and coming up on a real whopper.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

I agree, db. We sure aren't ready to migrate into space.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Yes, I'm well aware of that. 
Disease, famine, war / population control. It's the elephant in the room.


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

I have never read a thread with 70 postings from top to bottom and this is the first. I laughed my a$$ off. Mostly because of the quick wit of DKV.

DKV, thank you : ))

Has anyone ever considered that the orbit of earth around the sun is elliptical and not a constant ellipse ? In fact the orbit is ever changing, somewhat cyclical in nature where the ellipse shrinks and expands over 10's of thousands of years and we happen to be at the moment where the earth is getting closer to the sun during the summer season (sort of) and further away during the winter, but not far enough away to cause a "cooling" effect on a "seasonal scale". Thus being pounded with snow where previous records would make unlikely.

Thus climate change

The poles, greenland and visuals from satellites are no doubt, alarming as are the disappearance of most glaciers but as our earth gets closer to the sun in its never ending orbit, the ice on the poles will disappear eventually be gone. Kinda like the snow that falls off the barn roof on the North side. The snow is there, sometimes till June, and suddenly its is gone, vanished.

There isnt a thing we can do about it until we invent and mfg., a condom and slide the earth into it, a cosmic envelope so to speak,

The earth will be here in 2 gazillion years, + - a thousand billion, wether our species will still be on it, is definitely questionable.

At some point we will return to the cosmic dust from which we are all made of.


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

Google Carl Sagen. "The Pale Blue Dot" ……..pretty sure its on UTube

he has an incredible way of keeping life in perspective


----------



## 280305 (Sep 28, 2008)

*Everyone would think I'm somehow trying to connect pizza to religion…*

Perhaps you have the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Flying Pizza Monster confused.


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

but is the Pizza free of Glutens ?

Raise the bar…….is the Pizza "Soybean Free" for all you ever informed "earth huggers" lol


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

I like mine served, lathered with "Palm Oil"………*Not*


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

*earth will be here in 2 gazillion years, + - a thousand billion*

Doubt it. Sun will swallow us up when it becomes a super nova.

*That's 28.6% more than the current population in just less than 40 years. What is that going to do the planet?*

Just like cattle on the range or deer in the forest; overpopulation destroys the range.


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

thus my +- equation.

one needs only to look at their own waste line to determine if there will be enough food left.


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

you cant feed "Porkies" with sustainable farming


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

OK

Stop eating and no more pizza with pepporoni


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

only soy bean alternate, bacon bits from palm oil will be accepted from drive through sustainable fat farm supported multinationals who dismiss global warming due to disproportional consumption rates of first world nations


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

only Tarzan can save it

: ))


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Here is some good news.

Mainly because power plants have switched from coal to natural gas, climate-changing carbon dioxide emissions hit an unexpected 20-year low earlier this year, the Associated Press reports.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

BTW, antarctic ice core samples have shown carbon dioxide to be the result of climatic warming, not a cause.


----------



## HawkDriver (Mar 11, 2011)

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-impact-co2-emissions-us-drop-20-low-174616030--finance.html


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

Not sure if it had anything to do with global warming or not… but I had real bad case of poison ivy this year and I'm going to blame it on that ….......


----------



## gooseforsupper (Jul 18, 2012)

I can explain globull warming completely with two words:

Eco Profiteering.

It's all about the grant money, raising taxes, and wealth redistribution.

Nothing more than an excuse to scam the huddled masses.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

As someone who takes data for a living I have my doubts of the accuracy of ice core samples. Many scientists complain of bad data when it doesn't support their theory.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

AHA! People, I have discovered DKV's true identity!!! A former presidential fringe candidate, who appeared at a Primary debate in New Hampshire recently!!

Take a look:


----------



## gooseforsupper (Jul 18, 2012)

Carbon dioxide makes up .3% of the earths atmosphere. That's three tenths of one percent for the math challenged. Wow, the scientists are whining about an increase of 5% of carbon dioxode. Do you really think that and increase of .015% ( that would be 5 percent of three tenths of one percent) is going to alter the climate? Get real. I would whine for money too if my way of making a living depended upon it. 
So let's take a look at some of the Eco Profiteers out there for a second:

Education, billions of dollars of grant money at stake.

Solynda, Avant Solar, both went belly up after getting over a billion dollars with of taxpayer subsidies.

Vestas, wind turbines, laying people off now and waiting for the politicians to give them more tax credits. The windmills don't even pay for themselves before they wear out and need replacing. (great investment).

Ethanol, not economically sustainable without massive taxpayer support.

Flat out truth is that none of the globull warming solutions are economically sustainable (unless your on the recieving end and you have a politician willing to give you other peoples money…)

It's the Sun…..


----------



## miles125 (Jun 8, 2007)

The very word "climate" denotes change and fluctuation. Which appears to be a big dissappointment to narcissist who think the optimum earth climate occured on the day they were born.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Actually CO2 concentrations are about 390ppm, or 0.000390, or about 0.0390%.

Boy, all those stupid PhD climate scientists all over the world just needed to check in here to find out that they have no idea what's going on. I doubt any of the issues brought up here have ever been considered. I'm glad that 'crisis' has been averted.

Another thing to keep in mind, even if you discount global warming, is that as atmospheric CO2 concentration increase, the oceans will continue to acidify. This is simple chemical solubility, easy to understand and easy to measure; no debate on this one. More CO2 in the air equals more dissolved in the water. In not too long the amount of calcium carbonate available to form shells will be significantly reduced, which will have vast, and unpredictable, impacts on ocean ecosystems. The species impacted most directly includes not only crabs, clams, and lobsters (yummy) but bottom of the food chain phytoplankton as well as corals. What this will mean to the oceans as a source of food for us could be tremendous.

As an aside, to an earlier post, the earth is closest to the sun (perihelion) during winter in the northern hemisphere (147m km), and farther from the sun (aphelion) during northern hemisphere summer (152m km). The change in distance has a negligible effect on earth temperatures as the difference in distance is only about 3%.


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

Maybe the earth is getting warmer because people are getting fat er


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Shipping. Those huge container ships are filthy beasts. Obviously if you've got a job on one you'd be all for them. But tell me what is the sense in trawling for prawns in the North Atlantic, then sailing full steam ahead to have them shelled and processed in Vietnam and then bringing them back to England for distribution?
The cost saving in cheap labour and production makes money for the Board, do you think they give a monkey's about pollution?


----------



## gooseforsupper (Jul 18, 2012)

Gee John, I forgot it was parts per million, not %....I stand corrected.
So, how many parts per million increase does it take to acidify our vast oceans? 
It sounds like a stretch to say such a miniscule amount of CO2 could do such a thing. Except maybe in theory…


----------



## 280305 (Sep 28, 2008)

Think of a balance scale. Add an ounce to one side and it moves. The same thing happens if the balanced scale already has a ton on each side. The percentage change does not matter.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Goose - sorry if I sounded terse, I was just pointing out the concentration was lower than stated. The effect however, is still real.

The oceans are large, but not infinite. We used to think we could emit anything into the air because the skies were so big, but I don't think anyone will argue that smog is real. We emitted rather small amounts of CFC's into the air and caused measurable damage to the ozone layer; then banned those CFC's and have seen measurable improvement in the ozone layer. We used to think we could dump anything into waterways because they were big, until we killed rivers and lakes. We passed laws and regulations to limit dumping of pollutants into the air and water and made huge improvements in the quality of both. The planet is big, but humans are very numerous, a little from a whole lot of people adds up to huge quantities.

The pH of the oceans has already dropped (gotten more acidic) and continues to do so, as it must, as atmospheric CO2 concentrations increase. It is not theoretical. From pre-industrial times CO2 levels have climbed from 280ppm to 390ppm, dissolved CO2 in oceans has increased 30% and ocean pH has dropped 0.11 units (remember pH this is a log scale.) If we stopped emitting and CO2 today, the oceans will see another 0.1 unit drop before coming to equilibrium.

As this happens less calcium carbonate is available to animals that use it for shells. This will lead to reductions in populations; at what point reductions in populations has huge impacts on species we eat remains to be seen.

Not theoretical at all.


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

Why are so many ignoring the one atmospheric gas that contributes to 95% of the Greenhouse Effect? Could it be because politicians haven't figured out a way to control and tax it?


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

I'll bite, what gas are you referring to Jim?


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

Water vapor.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Which also increases with temperature. It is also beyond our control with 70% of the earth covered in it.


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

Which also increases with temperature. It is also* beyond our control *with 70% of the earth covered in it.

How true.

I wasn't trying to play 'gotcha' or be 'cute'. I meant to include it in my original post. (Not enough coffee yet)


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

It's a good point Jim; I'm not sure it's fully 90%, but it is a high percentage. It will also contribute to a positive feedback as temps increase, air can hold more water, which will help increase temps….


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

I have a solution. If we plant more plants they will take care of the CO2. We could all be munching more lettuce and celery. That would take care of the obesity problem. Kill 2 birds with one stone ;-)


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

Hey, Topa…
Plants and trees consume CO2 in their lifetime… then emit an equal amount of CO2 when they die. It's zero gain, zero loss. We are only able to make gains and losses on a small scale, and we'd leave a bigger burden to our grandchildren by planting more trees and plants today. Sounds weird, but it's true. This is the improbable-sounding truth when experts speak of the forest as the world's biggest polluter.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

*"Boy, all those stupid PhD climate scientists all over the world just needed to check in here to find out that they have no idea what's going on"*

Well they have reversed direction, in the 70's there was actually a global cooling scare. You can google this and you will find old magazine articles on it.

Ever notice that it is always hotter in the city than it is out in the country? I think overbuilding, paving over things, etc is probably a bigger cause. One of the criticisms of the data used is the urban heat sink encroachment on data stations. If a temperature data station was out in the country in the 60's and now it is surrounded by a suburb complete with a Walmart and its gigantic black asphalt parking lot of course the temperature will be higher than if it was still just country.

Right after the terrorist attacks on 9-11 almost all air traffic was grounded, this gave scientists a unique opportunity of a couple days to study the atmosphere without contrails. They found an increase in daily temperature range (meaning it got colder at night). If just a couple days of very little flying caused this (it's not certian it did btw) what does the thousands of flights daily, year after year do?

To me evidence points to other things such as contrails having a much larger effect on climate than CO2.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

poopie, Everybody munching lettuce and celery will still be good for obesity when the lobster are all gone ;-)


----------



## 280305 (Sep 28, 2008)

*Plants and trees consume CO2 in their lifetime… then emit an equal amount of CO2 when they die.*

I have an idea! We should do something with the wood from the trees that prevents it from decomposing, thus preventing the CO2 from returning to the atmosphere. Can anyone on this site think of any way to use a tree in such a way?


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Again, I'll reference Richard Mueller and his Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project. He was a darling of the skeptic set and set out to prove current global warming proponents were wrong (and largely funded by the Koch brothers.) He looked at the heat island effect you discuss (as well as other concerns.) His results ended up supporting prevailing theories and changing his mind. Here's his article in Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204422404576594872796327348.html

Obviously, I was being sarcastic earlier, but these guys aren't idiots, they're pretty smart guys. I completely dismiss the idea that they make this stuff up to get grant money. Do we really thing there is a global conspiracy of climate scientists? I could believe on or two groups, but all of them? Really?

And besides, if global warming wasn't there, do we really think they would be unemployed? PhD scientists aren't among the groups with the highest unemployment.

I find it much more likely that businesses with trillions to loose are more likely to sow doubt and confusion to protect themselves than the scientists are likely to engage in a successful global conspiracy. But apparently I'm in the minority here; which is fine.


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

Obviously, I was being sarcastic earlier, but these guys aren't idiots, they're pretty smart guys. I completely dismiss the idea that they make this stuff up to get grant money. Do we really thing there is a global conspiracy of climate scientists? I could believe on or two groups, but all of them? Really?

Unfortunately* some *scientists are 'ethically challenged'. They can also be driven by agendas and politics. I experienced it as a Wildlife Biologist for the USFS.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

I agree with you OldMarine. Us Americans are really into this conspiracy thing? Everything is a conspriacy. Could be at the government and banking levels…but not ALL scientists. Just doesn't meet the common sense test.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

jmos I am also a scientist, while I dont have a PhD I do have a masters degree and my line of work is designing systems that take data. I have looked for the raw data and the methods used to obtain it and it is simply not "open source". In making scientific measurements there is always an error, I have performed uncertianty analysis on systems and found that for a 95% confidence factor in the data this uncertianty is generally higher than most would believe. Now where I developed my scepticism from was a few years ago when some results were published claming a global temperature increase that I knew was within the uncertiantiy of the data. But I can't prove anything here because the instruments used and methodigy of testing is not available to me.

I am not a believer or a naysayer, what I am saying is I don't think such a massive, complicated system as the climate of the earth can be characterised so easily and more study is needed and more care should be taken when publishing results.

The politicization of climate science is probably the worst thing that could have ever happened to it. You have people like Al Gore telling people to drive less, dont drive as big a car and his actions don't really line up with his beliefs. I can damn well guarantee that his carbon footprint is 10x or more higher than mine.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

I don't in the conspiracy thing. More likely unethical people driven by personal motivations and aspirations.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

Here is a list of over 30000 American scientists that do not agree that global warming is man made. I looked at the list and found I know several, and these are not stupid people.

The global warming believers, instead of letting their science speak for itself, try to marginalize and vilify the scientists that do not agree with them. I know it happens in many fields but its bad science here and its bad science there.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

Pizza toppings, from the sauce up:

pound of Provalone Cheese
pound of ground beef'
pound of peperoni slices, or cubes
pound of ground Sausage
1/2 pound of black AND green Olives
1/2 pound of Banana pepers
1/2 pound of Onions chopped, or sliced ( your choice of red or white or both, even mixed)
1/2 pound of Green pepers
1/2 pound of diced bacon, not bacon Bits, real Bacon
1 pound of Mozzaralla cheese
1 pound of Cheddar Cheese ( extra sharp)

Sprinkle with Romano cheese. Prefer a deep dish style crust…..


----------



## 280305 (Sep 28, 2008)

Pat,

Looks like there is a conspiracy to hide that web site 

*Not Found
The requested URL /index.phpthat was not found on this server.
Apache/2.2.3 (CentOS) Server at www.petitionproject.org Port 80*

bandit,

Now we're talking pizza! That should probably go with a low-cal beverage.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

Chuck, sorry i messed up the inserting of the link by missing a space between the next word. The link works now.


----------



## gooseforsupper (Jul 18, 2012)

I like pineapple on my pizza, along with hot italian sausage, green pepper, onion, mushrooms, and lots of cheese…. 

and I still say…...

It's the Sun


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

Dan's theory of Global warming.

It's happening, for what ever reason.

There is no stopping it … so why fret about it.

What will eventually happen is all the ice will melt.

People will move away from the coast lines.

New York will become like Venice or New Orleans.

If it gets too hot or dry people will just move away from that place.

World is forever changing. No stopping it.

Mankind is like moss on a rock.

If the top side of the rock gets too hot and dry we with just move near the bottom.

If it gets too extreme, allot of us will die.

The ones that will live the longest are the ones that learn to live in the dark under the rock or on a boat with an umbrella.

I live in a big old brick house way-above-sea-level , My workshop is in-the-basement and never gets too hot down there anyway.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Dan, unfortunately and scarily so this is the mindset of most Americans. They can't be bothered with anything beyond the day to day struggle to keep their head above water and take care of their family.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Pat, I absolutely agree that the issue has been made far to political. Skepticism is always a good thing, but in the case of global warming there is valid scientific skepticism, and there is intentional misinformation promulgated by special interests. It's very difficult to sort out all the noise on this issue, which allow the average person to dismiss it, exactly as intended. That's why when someone like Mueller really looks into all the data, and ends up doing an about face on the issue, it really gives me pause.

Here's an interesting link about the petition you site http://www.desmogblog.com/art-robinson It appears it was an active attempt to dupe people into signing something. It's also a bit dated; Scientific American did a follow up later and a significant number of signatories indicated they would not sign it today. Further, few if any of the signatories were active climate scientists.

I find it hard to dismiss the global body of climate scientists as hacks who are conspiring to fool the world.

If some new technologies don't come along, I think Dan-O's description will be correct. Unfortunately, that will be one awful period to live through, which makes me worry for my kids.

I'll throw out one more reason why it's a good idea for the US to get off of oil, even if global warming either is not happening, or is happening but not caused by man; eliminating dependence on global oil markets. Just think how great it would be if we could tell OPEC to go pound sand. We could still pump oil and sell it on the global market, but we would be independent of all the craziness in the Middle East. The economic and national security benefits would be huge. This seems like something everyone should be in favor of.


----------



## gooseforsupper (Jul 18, 2012)

There is plenty of oil and natural gas to power our country for hundreds of years. All I see is corrupt eco-profiteers using corrupt politicians to fund their schemes, along with the social justice clowns trying to push their wealth redistribution agenda. Plenty of evidence for those not blinded by the fear whooped by by a corrupt press, and our school kids have been brainwashed into believing it all as fact.

Hundreds of billions of dollars being scamed by the eco-profiteers. Al Gore, Solyndra, Avant Solar, Vestas, carbon credit trading, research grants, education grants, smart meters, the list goes on and on…..

If any of these schemes had an ounce of integrety and promise, then private entrepenuers would be funding the research because it could be profitable. Government funding is nothing but a total failure since economic sustainability and profit are not part of the equation. CO2 makes such a great boogey man to scam the masses.

Since this thread won't let us get into the dirty little details of the corrupt politicians, it's not a total picture of what globull warming is all about.

That's my 2 cents and I'm sticking to it….


----------



## Tennessee (Jul 8, 2011)

If you read Margaret Wheatly's "Chaos Theory", her example is of a stream in the forest, loaded with rocks, dirt, and other debris. Over time the stream, due to many unpredictable events, may actually change course, dry up, flood, and over hundreds of years, do all these things multiple times.
But although man cannot predict the small items that happen in the stream, "like the butterfly from Mexico making the thunderstorm in New York", we can over time, look at the overall condition of the stream.

What you see, if you go back very far, is the earth seems to go in cycles, some 30 years, some a couple hundred, and some thousands of years. Which are we in? We probably do not know since our history is not deep enough. But I firmly believe we are in a cycle, not a permanent change by modern man. I believe that the dinosaurs probably had a similar effect on the earth, although different. Their simple body mass, their ability to deforest areas are all similar to what we see now. But we'll never know what the result would have been if you believe the meteor hit just off the Mexican coast and finished off the species.
I vote for cycle.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

What's not to believe about the Chicxulub impact? The evidence is there. There's a layer of iridium in every sedimentary rock formation and sea bed on earth that corresponds with the timeline. Shocked Quartz shows the direction and angle of impact.
Look at it like a giant butterfly flapping it's mega wings - if that hadn't happened in the course of Earth's history, do you think we'd be here, now?


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Goose, the problem with oil is that it is a global market. Short of nationalizing the US oil industry, oil will flow to those who are willing to pay for it. Even if we become net exporters of oil, a global disruption will still send cause US oil prices to spike. I'm not anti-oil, I worked in oil refining for 20 years. My point is that if we are not dependent on it, our whole foreign policy can change, and for the better. We can still produce oil and sell it, but we won't be at the mercy of foreign producers. Developing better alternative technologies would also give us a lucrative export market.

Most basic research in the US is funded by the government, not private industry. Take pharmaceuticals, they do little basic research, they build of promising research done at universities. They spend more on marketing than they do research. I'm in favor of government funded basic research (read universities), where I think we go wrong is picking winners like Solyndra.

As for funding, ExxonMobile made a $300million investment in oil from algae.


----------



## 280305 (Sep 28, 2008)

Here we are having a respectful and intelligent discussion of one of the most important and contentious issues facing us this millennium. Yet, one particular aspect has not been brought up, which I find very surprising. I hope that this does not offend anyone here; that is not my intention. I feel that this might be "the elephant in the room"; dare I say, "an inconvenient truth." OK, I'm groveling a little here in full knowledge that I am at the very least testing the recently instituted ban on religion and politics.

Does anyone else like artichoke hearts on pizza? We usually make our own pizza and have been most pleased with these canned artichoke hearts from Trader Joe's.

Through experimentation, we have discovered that the optimal size for the hearts on a pizza is achieved by simply bisecting each unit. This is where the Trader Joe's brand really shows its stuff. When we apply this bisection technique to the other brands, we always find that the resulting pieces have lost their integrity. We end up with many small leafy pieces, which is not to our liking.

Again, this is just one family's experience, and I certainly do not want to portray this as a peer-reviewed falsifiable scientific theory.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

Hey, wait a minute, DKV! I thought Global Warming IS a religion! Hmm, let's look at the parallels: Believers vs. Non-Believers, unprovable by science yet undisputable by science, nonbelievers subjected to scorn and ridicule, Believers insisting that everyone else conform to their lifestyle, nonbelievers denied opportunities for not marching in lockstep with the popular prevailing beliefs. Collection plate=carbon tax..Frightening the masses with predictions of gloom and doom for the purpose of uniting the ranks against an imaginary enemy… Anyone care to expand on this? *Oh, wait, BTW, any restaurant that insists on slicing a round pizza into checkerboard squares instead of pie-shaped slices, ...well that's simply heresy!!!*


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Poopiekat is absolutely right.. round pizza cut in squares is heresy!

Chuck, I 'm not an artichoke fan myself, but I'll defend to the death your right to eat them.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

Ty jmos! I seem to think that, although traditionally an Italian dish, it's the Greek restaurateurs who carry on the tradition. Hey, wanna peeve your server? Ask for Oregano….no self-respecting Graeco-American pizza shop will have it, and your waiter will likely spill water on you (or your tab will be wet) so that the cashier can give you attitude on your way out.


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

Hey, wait a minute, DKV! I thought Global Warming IS a religion! Hmm, let's look at the parallels: Believers vs. Non-Believers, unprovable by science yet undisputable by science, nonbelievers subjected to scorn and ridicule, Believers insisting that everyone else conform to their lifestyle, nonbelievers denied opportunities for not marching in lockstep with the popular prevailing beliefs. Collection plate=carbon tax..Frightening the masses with predictions of gloom and doom for the purpose of uniting the ranks against an imaginary enemy… Anyone care to expand on this?

Amen, Brother! LOL.

Square pizza 'slices' = blasphemy/heresy!!!


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Careful boys,you're getting very close to the sharp edge of forbidden fruit discussion and I for one want to shrivel,cower and throw myself facedown before the awful thought of banishment from our garden of woodworking. Martin, it was not my fault it was theirs. I want nothing to do with this disobedient, rebellious group of brainwashed nonbelievers. Nathan, please forgive me and do not cast me out. I left very clear and explicit instruction on what can and can't be discussed. Pick and choose those that should be banished to the nether regions but leave me and my woodworking loving soul out of any punishment you serve upon the evil ones that have polluted this thread.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

woot!


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

As I said before it would do alot if the global data was accessable, unaltered, as well as the methods, the mathmatical models, etc.

To compare the global warming arguement to a murder trial all evidence before modern times would be circumstantial. Assumptions are made that must hold true for the temperature estimations that were made using ice core samples, tree rings etc to be true. A lot of people dont understand that unless a data point was actually measured at a point in time then it is lost, everything before that is an estimation based on evidence and assumptions.

Now onto the definition of "modern times". As far as data acquisition goes there have been leaps and bounds made in equipment just since the 90's. Every time some new technology comes out it allows us to make more measurements, more accurate measurements, etc. So basically the farther back in time you go the more uncertian the data is.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

I told you guys not to buy in Florida. Ya never listen…


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Developers building on the shore of San Francisco Bay will now have to consider climate change in their plans.










A huge dam below the golden gate bridge would solve this problem.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

"We don't have to protect the environment - the Second Coming is at hand."- James Watt, Interior Secretary under Ronald Reagan


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

Do me a favour, if you would? Look up a song by Alice Cooper. Title is "Brutal Planet" and check out the actual lyrics. Then, print out the lyrics here, IF YOU DARE!

Just a "hint' of a few words…..." from up here, looks so nice.." be looking for it …....


----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)

"We don't have to protect the environment - the Second Coming is at hand."- James Watt, Interior Secretary under Ronald Reagan

Violated 2 rules in one post.


----------



## gooseforsupper (Jul 18, 2012)

Yep, it looks like you violated your own rules….


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

Deleted, looks like I mistook James Watt for someone else.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Am I now banned from the thread?


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## OldMarine (Mar 6, 2012)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## BillWhite (Jul 23, 2007)

Eating liver causes global warming.
Bill


----------



## Surfside (Jun 13, 2012)

Why can't people here not accept the fact that "Climate change" is happening? Haven't you heard of those stinging jelly fish who went near the shores of Spain because the waters that they used to swim got warmer? Glaciers melting and a part of Iceland's glacier broke which is much bigger than Manhattan? Polar bears moving north to find colder areas? Animals don't lie. They live with their instincts for their own survival. Those are just few of the many examples that climate change is happening.


----------



## gooseforsupper (Jul 18, 2012)

Oh Surfside… The polar bear populations are just fine and dandy. Don't listen to the politicians and the eco-profiteers and their scare tactics. I tend to believe the wildlife biologists on this one. Bear populations have been on a steady increase for decades, and their populations are very healthy, to the point of limited hunts to keep the populations at sustainable levels.

Of course the climate is changing, that's what it does. 
Deep down we all know that this climate change hysteria is all about money. Cash and power. Al Gore and his Chicago Climate Exchange…....

I have some Climate Hysteria Offset Credits I'd be willing to sell you… or maybe I could print up some polar bear stranded on the iceberg pictures to sell to raise money for polar bear awareness…. There has got to be a way I can cash in on the wave of hysteria…..


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

Well they have reversed direction, in the 70's there was actually a global cooling scare. You can google this and you will find old magazine articles on it.

And magazine articles are all you'll really find because the "scare" was created by Time and Newsweek to sell magazines, for which Newsweek later published an apology. There hasn't been any reversal of opinion, the overwhelming majority of climate scientists at that time believed the Earth was warming. I am a rabid skeptic. A couple years ago I decided to learn what I could about climate change and after months of studying I found no reason to doubt the prevailing opinion of climatologists and many, many, reasons to doubt the skeptics. I went into it with no opinion and only my skepticism and a little science background to aid me, though most of the science is beyond my education I was able to follow enough that I am willing to give the climate scientists the benefit of the doubt. One important distinction I learned was that the debates about IF have long petered out, the raging debates are about HOW and HOW MUCH.

Also, pepperoni and mushrooms is objectively the best kind of pizza and any other opinions are wrong.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

My doubts about the cause of climate change is based on my perception of scientist who want to make news worthy stories. For example:

Recently an articale in my newspaper reported that *research suggests that NSAID , nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, may help prevent sun exposure related health problems.* However, on the information sheets provided with these drugs it states *stay out of bright sun when using these drugs!*

Apparently, the researchers do not read the information sheets with these drugs. The problem with any discussion on global warming/climate change is that there is no information sheet to read or, for that matter, to ignore!


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

researchers do not read the information sheets with these drugs.

I had no idea what an NSAID was so I looked it up and it's basically a catch-all term for stuff like aspirin and ibuprofen. One of the possible side effects is photosensitivity, which I didn't know. If you had sun exposure related health problems it would make sense to stay out of the sun; more-so if taking something that increases photosensitivity. And the claim appears to be that it might help prevent skin cancer, not that you can spend everyday at the beach without worry. To go even further, if you read up on the study it's pretty weak. Of the study group only 1/100 got skin cancer and those taking NSAID's were 15% less likely, which amounts to very little when 99% are not getting cancer to begin with. This is the type of critical thinking you should bring to any subject. Your statement about researchers not reading the information sheets doesn't make sense. How you relate this to an entirely different topic makes even less sense. Basically a fallacious argument.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

It was tongue in cheek humor! Aimed basically at SOME research which may be flawed!

The statement about information sheets was also humor because the Earth does not/never did have an information sheet! If it did, we would know what to do about climate change!

*You read way to much seriousness into my post as I was just following some of the other comments in this forum; just check back a few before mine!*

I could also add that Al Gore caused global warming/climate change … do you take that seriously?


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*Why do all of the climate scientists agree concerning climate change and it is happening? *
.
They don't.
.
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html


----------



## Surfside (Jun 13, 2012)

Let's put aside the polar bear population and talk about the changing climate. Are we aware that the climate is changing drastically, or are we not? This drastic change can cause damages to every living thing on Earth. This includes us, humans. It really doesn't matter if politicians exaggerate and ride the waves of the on going issue to gain money and power, because the point there is that it is happening now and will continue to change in the near future. And everyone's affected. Maybe there really are people who think that way, eco-profiteers as you've said. Who cares? What's important is we do our share. Do our part. We may not restart the climate to what it was before, at least we did our responsibility in taking care of our planet. The only place that we call "home".


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

*It really doesn't matter if politicians exaggerate and ride the waves of the on going issue to gain money and power, *

You don't see any problem with that?

The scare is from the politicians and carbon credit profiteers…. they control the data, so what information do you change your lifestyle based on?

As the industrialization of the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China) that are all exempted from Kyoto as 'developing' countries, have long ago surpassed the USA in greenhouse gas emissions, and continue to INCREASE.

What actions taken by the USA will reverse the effect?
---------------------------
Excerpt from http://www.globalresearch.ca/conflicting-views-on-climate-change-fire-and-ice/
Just as the weather has changed over time, so has the reporting - blowing hot or cold with short-term changes in temperature.

Following the ice age threats from the late 1800s, fears of an imminent and icy catastrophe were compounded in the 1920s by Arctic explorer Donald MacMillan and an obsession with the news of his polar expedition. As the Times put it on Feb. 24, 1895, "Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again."

Those concerns lasted well into the late 1920s. But when the earth's surface warmed less than half a degree, newspapers and magazines responded with stories about the new threat. Once again the Times was out in front, cautioning "the earth is steadily growing warmer."

After a while, that second phase of climate cautions began to fade. By 1954, Fortune magazine was warming to another cooling trend and ran an article titled "Climate - the Heat May Be Off." As the United States and the old Soviet Union faced off, the media joined them with reports of a more dangerous Cold War of Man vs. Nature.

The New York Times ran warming stories into the late 1950s, but it too came around to the new fears. Just three decades ago, in 1975, the paper reported: "A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable."

That trend, too, cooled off and was replaced by the current era of reporting on the dangers of global warming. Just six years later, on Aug. 22, 1981, the Times quoted seven government atmospheric scientists who predicted global warming of an "almost unprecedented magnitude." 
--------------------------------


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*It really doesn't matter if politicians exaggerate and ride the waves of the on going issue to gain money and power, 
.*
I have a problem with that.


----------



## Surfside (Jun 13, 2012)

What I meant on that line is that, no matter what we do to reveal that those people are playing along with the issue, we can't overpower them. There are only a few people who can think this way, me, you, and some. And the rest of the world will believe on the information they reveal to the general public. How can I tell? An example: will you believe somebody who's not part of a national organization who claims that his findings are true and the government's as false? Certainly, no! (Based on an ordinary person's view of things). That's why what matters most are the things that we do to help our planet to survive the climate change. We just need to take our step.


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

It was tongue in cheek humor!

Sorry Oldnovice, obviously my humor detector needs recalibration. It's just I spent so much time researching this and I enjoy discussing it.

Why do all of the climate scientists agree concerning climate change and it is happening? 
.
They don't.

Bertha, while doing my own research on climate I ran into links like this all the time and honestly not one ever panned out, every one was bogus, so forgive me but I'm not going to put effort into this specific link because at first glance it is a generic list. The number of "skeptics" is huge but the number of qualified skeptics is very small. A few years back there were two well regarded physicists who set out to prove climatologists wrong. Their paper received (and still receives) much fanfare although their methodology has been demonstrated as flawed, basically they were great physicists but had no idea what they were doing in climate research. There are also a number of papers put forth by skeptics who later reversed their opinions because flaws in their data or methodology were uncovered. Quite honestly, the whole idea that there are a legion of qualified skeptics is a myth. Most disagreements are over details. So I say all that to say this…. the quantity of papers (if they even exist) are irrelevant, it is the quality of the research that counts. The most important point though is that you shouldn't treat science like a sporting event, choosing a team then cheering them on. If you wish to accept that these 1100 alleged skeptic papers are valid, then you should be equally accepting of the tens of thousands of papers even if they support conclusions you don't like.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

Someone with the expertise should create a Venn diagram to help apply some logic to the various opinion expressed in this forum. Here are some of the sets I have detected in this forum so far:
Those who believe/feel

That GW/CC is fiction
That GW/CC is fact
It is caused by humans
It is a natural cycle of nature
It is a combination of natural cycles and humankind
That mankind can reverse it
That mankind cannot reverse it
That we should ….

*It might add some logic to this topic!*


----------



## gooseforsupper (Jul 18, 2012)

9. That GW/CC is an excuse to do social engineering for profit and political gain….


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

BTW, I did not mean to write "tens of thousands" in my previous post; that should have read "thousands".


----------



## MarcusM (Mar 29, 2010)

Nah…add number 9 to a Venn diagram…couple good stout beers and all you'd end up with is a half-assed Rorschach test


----------



## Surfside (Jun 13, 2012)

How about this? 
To those who do not believe GW/CC to be real, can you present facts about your claims? Please do not tell me that you just don't believe it, because it doesn't matter if you believe or not. What matters is if it is the truth. I myself doesn't close my ears to the possibility that there really are those who goes "out of the record" to take profit from the on going issue. That's what politics always does. But I believe that GW/CC is coming and is happening.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

GW/CC +1


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

Someone with the expertise should create a Venn diagram


----------



## crank49 (Apr 7, 2010)

9. That GW/CC is an excuse to do social engineering for profit and political gain….

My opinion as well.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

An edible Venn … ! Good for the body and the soul!


----------



## Surfside (Jun 13, 2012)

Hail oh Venn!


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## craftsman on the lake (Dec 27, 2008)

When I read all the comments and those that can solve this thing or have evidence and bad science to prove it one way or another, one thing comes to mind.

Simpletons


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

I lived on Spencer glacier for 3 weeks in the 80's, it's now called Spencer Lake.


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll…


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

Most of the scientist studying GW are paid by the government. If they don't come with the right answers they get no more funding. Therefore I don't trust the answers.

The globalist what to control you and me. This is one of their tools.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

How do you explain at NW Passage; ie, navigational water route above Canada?


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

Most of the skeptics studying GW are paid by big oil. If they don't come with the right answers they get no more funding. Therefore I don't trust the answers.

The corporations want to control you and me. This is one of their tools.


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

wormil

Just goes to show you, you can't trust anyone. Not even DKV.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

I for one, believe that the human race is largely responsible for climate change. As a species, we are like locusts, devouring every resource there is.
Look around you, look at all the stuff you got. Ever stop to think about the amount of energy it takes to make a concrete block, a beer can, the windows you look out of?
And while in the West, governments pledge to reduce emissions, the Chinese open a new coal fired power station every month (though these are cleaner and greener than those in the West), and they want cars, lots and lots of cars too, but then so do the Indians, and who are we in relative luxury to say they can't have it?
And this is all fuelled by dino juice and coal, and where did the smoke go? Same place it went during the Industrial Revolution. And where there isn't readily available fossil fuel to plunder, they cut down rainforests and raise cattle, which is basically like swapping oxygen for methane.
Thinking that scientists and sceptics come up with answers to please their paymasters is plain stoopid. While there's always a few who do personal gain, is anyone that cynical to think that integrity doesn't exist in the scientific community?
Of course, there's a lot of confusion too. The study of GW and CC is new, they don't have all the answers, which is not surprising really - take into account things like the jetstreams which weren't discovered until there was a need to fly bomber planes at high altitude to Japan. 
Comparing today to 10 million years ago doesn't cut it either, as the continents have moved, Mount Everest is higher, and the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans weren't divided.
Anyone who doesn't believe in climate change should take a holiday to the Horn of Africa, where drought years have changed from one in eight to one in every two or three. That might make them change their minds.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

We gave it to the Chinese and Indians. Pepsi sent Nixon to China to open up the market. Jack Walsh, ex GE CEO invented outsourcing while on a trip to India. He saw hordes of people who spoke English. He asked him self why pay Americans high wages to do things these people will do for nearly nothing? The rest is history, as they say. We literally gave them the hand out that has become the hand up. It has gone so far now, I don't think we can say no, they can't have a modern lifestyle. It remains to be seen if they achieve it.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

banter
banter
banter


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## Simon2822 (Oct 16, 2011)

Vostok ice core data..










It's been happening for a few years now - with and without our help


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

The New York Times

It's Official: 2012 Was Hottest Year Ever in U.S.

By JUSTIN GILLIS

Published: January 8, 2013 Comment

FACEBOOKTWITTERGOOGLE+SAVEE-MAILSHAREPRINTREPRINTSThe numbers are in: 2012, the year of a blistering March heat wave, a severe drought in the Corn Belt and a massive storm that caused broad devastation in mid-Atlantic states, turns out to have been the hottest year ever recorded in the contiguous United States.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Wettest year on record in UK.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

On post #190

Although interesting, the data does not look at all contiguous which in itself is a little disturbing!

*On the good side it looks like the Great Lakes were all near normal in temperature!*


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

*We are having a record cold winter so far … in California, very unusual!*


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

Keep posting those picture DKV it makes us feel a little warmer while we are indeed freezing our a__ off in California. We are in a record cold spell.

My neighbor has lived here to nearly 76 years and he says it has never been so cold for so long. He was shocked to find ice on his patio yesterday about 9:00 AM.

But you and I both know that this may just be all part of the same phenomenon of climate change!


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

The world weather is changing. I would like to hear from all the naysayers.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## msmith1199 (Oct 24, 2012)

I was up at this park near my house, you may have heard of it, Yosemite National Park. They have this big valley there with these shear granite walls. I'm told that glaciers moved through that valley and carved those walls. Since you can drive right through that Valley now I'm guess those massive glaciers must have melted. Funny thing, I can't find any pictures anyplace of that valley filled with ice. And it seems that before the white man ever even got here that Indians used to live in that valley and there was no ice in it then either. Seems to me that there hasn't been any ice in that valley for many thousands of years, long before we started burning fossil fuels. What do you supposed caused the climate to change way back then? Could it be there is no "normal" for the Earth's climate? Is it possible that the climate just changes and goes through cycles and there is nothing we can do about it?


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Mark Smith, I agree climate change is cyclic and there's nothing we can do about it unless it is hurried along by man and his polluting ways…


----------



## msmith1199 (Oct 24, 2012)

DKV, I guess you'll just have to call me a skeptic. I'm all in favor of cleaning the air and we should be working toward that anyway using common sense solutions that don't destroy our economy, but on the man-made global warming, I just see too many people making too much money off of it as well as gaining political power using it as an excuse. And nothing irks me more than all these Hollywood types and rich politicians preaching how we are destroying the planet, and then going and getting in their private jets and flying back to their 10,000 square foot houses and sitting in their giant hottubs or swimming in their Olympic size heated pools. I guess I just don't understand why they think conserving is only for everybody else and not them.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

Mark, DKV, I agree with both! Climate change is a cyclical event and WE haven't been around long enough to realize the last time it happened.

There are things we do know like glaciers advance/recede, the Sahara was once an ocean, the western half of north America was covered by a great sea, the continents as we know them now did not look like this at one time … and many others!

We should keep our "house" clean and be good stewards as this is the only place we have …. for now! But we also should not be stupid and think we can "pay" our way out of this to those wanting to make a buck or three!


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Oldnovice, you said "be good stewards" and I agree. Even though I love working with wood I get sad everytime I see another old growth tree being cut down.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

DKV, you must have been real ticked off to see all the trees they cut down to get the shuttle to its resting place!

They promised that they would replace all to the ones they cut down but that was a government promise for what they are worth.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

New Game in Russia for Winter 2012 - "Find your car!" And Bring out the Vodka..
Note - photos taken in Omsk , Siberia on 4th Feb 2012














































It would be an absolute bugger if you dug out the wrong car!!!


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

DaN has a unique way of communicating. I like it…


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Goodbye Sacramento…


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

- - We could solve the political ills of the USA!! *Fire up the coal plants, it is our only hope!* Bye Bye DC!


----------



## Milled (Dec 15, 2013)

A lot has changed in three years, now most intelligent folks believe in it.


----------



## woodbutcherbynight (Oct 21, 2011)

I know some that might refer to history when the intellectual thinkers of the day said the world was flat. LOL


----------



## Milled (Dec 15, 2013)

The church led the thought process on the flat world thing…everyone followed so as not to be kicked out of the church.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

Wait a minute, the world is not flat?


----------



## Milled (Dec 15, 2013)

oldnovice, the world is round and warming.


----------



## woodbutcherbynight (Oct 21, 2011)

> Wait a minute, the world is not flat?
> 
> - oldnovice


ROFLMAO


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we shall die.

Nothing last forever. Quality over quantity.

Have fun while it last.


----------



## Milled (Dec 15, 2013)

I would like to believe that global warming isn't happening but I can't find any scientific evidence to dispute the scientists. Can someone help?


----------



## Milled (Dec 15, 2013)

I would like to believe that global warming isn't happening but I can't find any scientific evidence to dispute the scientists. Can someone help?


----------



## Cricket (Jan 15, 2014)

> I would like to believe that global warming isn t happening but I can t find any scientific evidence to dispute the scientists. Can someone help?
> 
> - Milled


Seriously DKV? How many accounts are you going to make?

This thread is now closed.


----------

