DiscoWeb Message Boards
 

Go Back   DiscoWeb Message Boards > DiscoWeb Non-Technical Boards > Politics

Politics Political BS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #676  
Old 03-16-2017, 02:25 PM
brian4d brian4d is offline
I'm still not Senior? WTF?
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: High Point, NC
Posts: 5,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTyrrell View Post
Not sure what your point is.

Cows expel methane, a greenhouse gas.

Engines expel carbon dioxide, also a greenhouse gas.

Both are being targeted to reduce greenhouse gas emission.
Methane isn't exactly targeted as directly causing air quality problems. CO2 is. Hence, smog.

I guess my point was as I mentioned earlier, Air quality and Climate change can be argued to be two different issues. My reasoning would be methane gas (supposedly) has a much larger negative effect on climate change than CO2. My other point is that it would take 10 brand new cars to produce the amount of C02 that just 1 lawnmower does. Fun facts like this really make you think.
Reply With Quote
  #677  
Old 03-16-2017, 03:27 PM
ERover82's Avatar
ERover82 ERover82 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Darien Gap
Posts: 2,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian4d View Post
Methane isn't exactly targeted as directly causing air quality problems. CO2 is. Hence, smog.

I guess my point was as I mentioned earlier, Air quality and Climate change can be argued to be two different issues. My reasoning would be methane gas (supposedly) has a much larger negative effect on climate change than CO2. My other point is that it would take 10 brand new cars to produce the amount of C02 that just 1 lawnmower does. Fun facts like this really make you think.
CO2 does not cause "air quality problems", it's simply a greenhouse gas like methane. It's the hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and NOx that cause air quality problems.

Methane accounts for 14 to 50 percent of emissions worldwide, depending who you ask, but traps up to 100 times more heat than carbon dioxide per molecule. Both methane and CO2 are significant contributors to greenhouse gas, and both are being studied and targeted with solutions.

Yes small engines emit more CO2 than auto engine, but cars still emit far more CO2 and pollutants than lawnmowers etc because they're used far more often and longer periods.
Reply With Quote
  #678  
Old 03-16-2017, 04:08 PM
Ed Cheung's Avatar
Ed Cheung Ed Cheung is offline
Senior Wannabe
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_Rupp View Post
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/02...lobal-warming/

It's great to see the pretend scientist guy start to get hot under the collar by Tucker Carlson's questions. I love how "settled" science is the game ender for debate with these alarmists. If science was settled and no further debate was permitted, the earth would still be flat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWT-EWKIR3M

Same conversation happened 5 years ago.....
__________________
Ed
98 Disco I=> Gone
96 E39 Supercharged 540i6MT
Reply With Quote
  #679  
Old 02-06-2018, 09:54 AM
brian4d brian4d is offline
I'm still not Senior? WTF?
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: High Point, NC
Posts: 5,005
Thought provoking.

https://www.prageru.com/videos/can-c...climate-change


__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmodg View Post
Thanks Brian - for being you!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGaynor View Post
Brian was right!
Reply With Quote
  #680  
Old 02-06-2018, 10:24 AM
Blue's Avatar
Blue Blue is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 8,291
Member Trucks
Climate models are a joke. All the elite like to think they are so smart when they say things like “models predict this and that” but everyone who’s not a moron understands that climate models are dogshit after about a week. Just ask Algore.
__________________
Blue
2004 D2
Reply With Quote
  #681  
Old 02-06-2018, 10:44 AM
brian4d brian4d is offline
I'm still not Senior? WTF?
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: High Point, NC
Posts: 5,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue View Post
Climate models are a joke. All the elite like to think they are so smart when they say things like ?models predict this and that? but everyone who?s not a moron understands that climate models are dogshit after about a week. Just ask Algore.
Honestly, I was more impressed with the mans accomplishments than what he had to say. However, for someone of that caliber to take that stance is telling. Without models the Climate change theory falls flat.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmodg View Post
Thanks Brian - for being you!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGaynor View Post
Brian was right!
Reply With Quote
  #682  
Old 02-06-2018, 11:19 AM
SGaynor's Avatar
SGaynor SGaynor is offline
KN4KFS
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bristol, TN
Posts: 5,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian4d View Post
Honestly, I was more impressed with the mans accomplishments than what he had to say. However, for someone of that caliber to take that stance is telling. Without models the Climate change theory falls flat.
There is a significant rift between the older "climate" scientists and the newer generation. The older ones were generally physicists/physical chemists/geologists who developed climate models based on first principles. Key examples are Judith Curry (she quit as a Prof at GaTech a couple years back) and the late William Gray at CO State (the guy who predicted hurricane activity every year).

The new breed rely on the computer simulations to predict the future.

Both try to do the same thing, but the older group worked more on first principles (their argument) vs just running simulations. The older group say that there is still a significant lack of understanding of those first principles, and how multiple systems interact with each other; that uncertainty leads to models that are not reliable.

As an experimentalist, I fall in to the camp of the older group. Models are great when the inputs/equations are worked out. But if not? Garbage in = garbage out.

The older group doesn't necessarily say that warming isn't occurring, just that you can't predict the disasters that some of the modelers are hyping (NYC! Tokyo! London! All under water in 150 years!), and then say that drastic changes to society are required (ie, everyone live in mud huts).
__________________
Scott

'03 HSE
Go Hokies! - Ut Prosim


Dangerous time when our country is led by those who will lie about anything, backed by those who will believe anything, based on information from media sources that will say anything. Americans must break out of that bubble and seek truth.
Reply With Quote
  #683  
Old 02-06-2018, 11:57 AM
brian4d brian4d is offline
I'm still not Senior? WTF?
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: High Point, NC
Posts: 5,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGaynor View Post
[URL="http://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2017/02/Curry-2017.pdf"]you can't predict the disasters
Oddly I agree with a lot of what you said except this. The models don't predict disasters they predict warming/cooling trends and in return disasters may be predicted.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmodg View Post
Thanks Brian - for being you!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGaynor View Post
Brian was right!
Reply With Quote
  #684  
Old 02-06-2018, 12:10 PM
SGaynor's Avatar
SGaynor SGaynor is offline
KN4KFS
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bristol, TN
Posts: 5,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian4d View Post
Oddly I agree with a lot of what you said except this. The models don't predict disasters they predict warming/cooling trends and in return disasters may be predicted.
You're saying the same thing as me.

The disasters are predicted via extension - warming causes polar ice to melt, melted ice causes sea levels to rise (this is predicted by models), rising sea levels flood cities (a disaster!).
__________________
Scott

'03 HSE
Go Hokies! - Ut Prosim


Dangerous time when our country is led by those who will lie about anything, backed by those who will believe anything, based on information from media sources that will say anything. Americans must break out of that bubble and seek truth.
Reply With Quote
  #685  
Old 02-06-2018, 12:45 PM
1920SF's Avatar
1920SF 1920SF is offline
KK4DPX
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NoVA
Posts: 2,705
Member Trucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGaynor View Post
You're saying the same thing as me.

The disasters are predicted via extension - warming causes polar ice to melt, melted ice causes sea levels to rise (this is predicted by models), rising sea levels flood cities (a disaster!).
What doesn't seem to get captured as well is the degree of volatility of the weather; that's across a wide spectrum of effects.

The trend in science towards quant only exploration is problematic on so many levels, even in the 'hard' science side of things it just misses too much-in my opinion.
__________________
2006 LR3
1996 Disco 5-speed
1954 Series 1 86"
Reply With Quote
  #686  
Old 02-06-2018, 01:29 PM
SGaynor's Avatar
SGaynor SGaynor is offline
KN4KFS
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bristol, TN
Posts: 5,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1920SF View Post
The trend in science towards quant only exploration is problematic on so many levels, even in the 'hard' science side of things it just misses too much-in my opinion.
Computers are cheap, gin out lots of data (in a short period) and produce sexy graphics. All great for publishing (and in turn getting funding).

Spending days/weeks or even months (years for space or collider experiments) designing and carrying out experiments are the opposite.

IMO, models are great for getting me close to the answer - but I still have to prove/fine tune it with an actual experiment. (And it always makes me smile when my models are damn close to the experiment!)

Of course it's hard to do "the experiment" when one is talking about something happening 100 years into the future, so how can you refute what the modelers are saying (especially when they give a range - like sea levels increasing from 0.25" to 4")? You can't.

That is what frustrates the Old School - these models are taken as Holy Writ and to question them means to be excommunicated (Curry's point).
__________________
Scott

'03 HSE
Go Hokies! - Ut Prosim


Dangerous time when our country is led by those who will lie about anything, backed by those who will believe anything, based on information from media sources that will say anything. Americans must break out of that bubble and seek truth.
Reply With Quote
  #687  
Old 02-06-2018, 02:38 PM
Rob371's Avatar
Rob371 Rob371 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Charlevoix, Michigan
Posts: 150
Member Trucks
Sorry, late to the party and I'm not interested in an unwinnable debate. You guys are talking over my head anyway so I'm just going to bump and run,...

I just read an article from Heritage Foundation the other day. A "study" suggesting (in a nutshell) that a human traveling twelve miles on a bicycle produces more CO2 then an average car travelling same distance. So park the bike, take the rover, save planet. Right?

But plants thrive on CO2 don't they? So then either outcome is a win.

I'm no scientist and nor am I vested in a specific outcome. I'd be considered a climate denier but in my view the climate has been changing, warming and cooling, for long before man and internal combustion engines. The real problem, I believe, are all those that are vested in their narrative and have staked their careers on it. It's not like they can turn back now. Besides, there's big money in it. The real driving factor in my opinion. Global warming, climate change, severe weather (however one wants to package it, and repackage) has become a tool for political and monetary gain so the models will show whatever modelers want the outcome to be.

Ignoring the past while trying to predict the future just doesn't sound very scientific.

It's still just a theory after all isn't it? So anyone saying it's settled science is a fool or has an agenda in my opinion.
__________________
If it ain't something, it's something else.
Reply With Quote
  #688  
Old 02-06-2018, 06:38 PM
Blue's Avatar
Blue Blue is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 8,291
Member Trucks
You've summed it up pretty damn well.
__________________
Blue
2004 D2
Reply With Quote
  #689  
Old 04-26-2018, 10:39 AM
bigred's Avatar
bigred bigred is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: East Coast
Posts: 3,450
https://www.investors.com/politics/e...co2-emissions/
__________________


(405): I feel like tequila is Gods way of lighting my fuse to do something awesome
Reply With Quote
  #690  
Old 04-26-2018, 11:48 AM
kennith kennith is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 9,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob371 View Post
Sorry, late to the party and I'm not interested in an unwinnable debate. You guys are talking over my head anyway so I'm just going to bump and run,...

I just read an article from Heritage Foundation the other day. A "study" suggesting (in a nutshell) that a human traveling twelve miles on a bicycle produces more CO2 then an average car travelling same distance. So park the bike, take the rover, save planet. Right?

But plants thrive on CO2 don't they? So then either outcome is a win.

I'm no scientist and nor am I vested in a specific outcome. I'd be considered a climate denier but in my view the climate has been changing, warming and cooling, for long before man and internal combustion engines. The real problem, I believe, are all those that are vested in their narrative and have staked their careers on it. It's not like they can turn back now. Besides, there's big money in it. The real driving factor in my opinion. Global warming, climate change, severe weather (however one wants to package it, and repackage) has become a tool for political and monetary gain so the models will show whatever modelers want the outcome to be.

Ignoring the past while trying to predict the future just doesn't sound very scientific.

It's still just a theory after all isn't it? So anyone saying it's settled science is a fool or has an agenda in my opinion.
Gravity is a theory.

There is no "law" anymore. You have hypothesis and theory.

When you hear someone say "in theory", generally they're using the wrong word.

A theory is as close to "settled science" as you get.

The obvious take on this is a matter of time. Right now, we are in no danger. 100 years from now, we certainly will be. The problem is sacrificing all the progress we've made in the name of rushing to solutions. To paraphrase Tyson: Right now we're at 80% deployment and 20% research. It should be the other way around.

Currently, the internal combustion engine is, by far and away, the most efficient and environmentally conscious manner of moving a vehicle that we have. It is fully matured technology.

The mistake the entire world is making is determining that solutions must be rushed out the door immediately. That has been the downfall of human innovation since the dawn of time. Yes, it's all about money, but only because people are damnable fools.

If the average person could think critically, we wouldn't be in this mess of a movement. We've wasted nearly two decades fucking with bullshit, destroying progress, and in general wasting everyone's time. All the while we're creeping closer to the day it will indeed become a problem.

When developing nations finish industrializing their own territories, and as population increases, that's when we'll be affecting the climate by our own actions. We should have been doing proper research this entire time.

It may well be too late at this point.

Cheers,

Kennith
__________________
Life is too serious to be taken seriously.

Dan Chapman is a coward. I own a magical island.
Reply With Quote
  #691  
Old 08-30-2018, 09:14 PM
Blue's Avatar
Blue Blue is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 8,291
Member Trucks
In other news, apparently Algore is still alive....

http://www.foxla.com/news/local-news...-trump-resign-
__________________
Blue
2004 D2
Reply With Quote
  #692  
Old 09-03-2018, 12:56 PM
kennith kennith is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 9,336
Gore is a moron. He's inverted environmentalism and set us on a course of destruction rather than salvation.

If I had a time machine I'd go back and cure the world of his bullshit.

Cheers,

Kennith
__________________
Life is too serious to be taken seriously.

Dan Chapman is a coward. I own a magical island.
Reply With Quote
  #693  
Old 09-04-2018, 01:17 AM
Blue's Avatar
Blue Blue is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 8,291
Member Trucks
If I had a time machine I’d go back to early 2000 and form a band called The Hanging Chads. Kennith on the cowbell.
__________________
Blue
2004 D2
Reply With Quote
  #694  
Old 09-04-2018, 03:43 AM
gimebakmybulits gimebakmybulits is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 218
The fact that Al Gore and Enron were both poised to be at the front of the carbon credit cough:scam:cough feeding trough.......should be a bit of a clue to the bullshit and greed involved.
__________________
98 Disco 1
11 RRS LUX
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Global Warming Truth nathansharkey General 16 03-15-2007 11:05 PM
More Evidence of Global Warming Jake General 11 03-10-2007 09:09 PM
Fight Global Warming! (you, that is,,, I need a swim) SCSL General 37 03-02-2007 02:06 PM
Global Warming theories must be challenged nathansharkey General 93 02-23-2007 02:33 PM
An Inconvenient Truth montanablur General 71 07-27-2006 06:16 PM

» Log in
User Name Not a member yet?
Register Now!
Password
» Today's Birthdays
calahand (70)
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2000 - 2015, DiscoWeb.org. All rights reserved.

Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.