Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
OverSword

Global Waming Scam Exposed As A Sham

246 posts in this topic

I just want to keep our motorbikes, the only real problem with them is the rain here. That and decentralize everything (so there is little need to travel to get to work or university or shopping centers or gov't services) -- at least they are doing that (central planning makes it possible to tell developers they have to build this or that in a neighborhood that needs it, not where there are too many already).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides, they are Germans. They queue up for everything in nice neat lines. I even expect they respect bus lanes without having to hire a thousand cops to enforce them (as though HCMC had room for more vehicle lanes anyway).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see a table of first frost for some location away from a big city over a century or so. For a dozen or so towns actually.

I have that information on EXCEL files for the Ouachita National Forest. You'll have to check the dates of first and last frosts using the low-temperature data and compile your own table, but I have already done the hard part of digging it out of NCDC's records. There are 31 stations on the list, but only two or three go back a century. There are techniques for estimating missing temp data with about 90% accuracy if you want to use them. Using them, you should be able to get back to 1896, leaving a few gaps. Let me know and I'll email them to you.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to keep our motorbikes,

I don't see a problem with motorbikes. They're more efficient than cars. We should be encouraging them.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cornelius said

"Choosing only to look at the 15year period simply because it supports your beliefs is the only unacceptable thing here - and as I have pointed out is called cherry picking."

I choose to look at the 15 year interval to find a zero trend, not because "it supports my beliefs", but because that is the interval period given by the climate modelers in 2008 as a falsifiability test against their climate models. if you find that unacceptable then take it up with the climate modelers who stated it.

I believe what the modelers are saying is that the accuracy level of their models does not extend to shorter time intervals. That being the case, you'll only prove what they have already admitted: their models aren't accuarte at short intervals.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the trend is something to be calculated not "proven".

You need to calculate a number that is not just numerical gibberish. It has to mean something.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a problem with motorbikes. They're more efficient than cars. We should be encouraging them.

Doug

Mythbusters found that bikes save feul but pollute as bad as cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The climate cycle is 100,000 years, no 15 or 30.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mythbusters found that bikes save feul but pollute as bad as cars.

Fuel that is saved is not burned. And that means less CO2 pollution.

I suspect Myth Buster pollution estimates were couched in terms of amounts per unit of exhaust. If so, the concentrations can be as bad, or even worse than cars, but still come out ahead because of the smaller amount of fuel used.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The climate cycle is 100,000 years, no 15 or 30.

There are lots of natural cycles that impact climate. There is no such thing as "the climate cycle."

That 100,000-year figure sounds like one of the three Milankovic cycles. There's also Bond Cycles (1500 years), the solar cycle (variable, nine to 14 years), the Chandler wobble (3.5 and 7 years) and cycles produced by ocean circulations (North Atlantic Oscillation, Pacific Decadal Oscillation, El Nino Southern Oscillation, etc.). Lots of natural cycles have an impact.

The 30-year convention is just a measuring device needed because anything less than 30 years will not produce statistically sound results. It's a measuring device, not a natural cycle.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuel that is saved is not burned. And that means less CO2 pollution.

I suspect Myth Buster pollution estimates were couched in terms of amounts per unit of exhaust. If so, the concentrations can be as bad, or even worse than cars, but still come out ahead because of the smaller amount of fuel used.

Doug

Well if you drive one of those elcheapo two-cylinder Chinese jobs I'm sure there is a lot of pollution, but they've pretty much disappeared now. I'm beginning to see electric motobikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you drive one of those elcheapo two-cylinder Chinese jobs I'm sure there is a lot of pollution, but they've pretty much disappeared now. I'm beginning to see electric motobikes.

I quite fancy getting an electric rickshaw for local runarounds. They are cheap but not easily available over here in Europe.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of natural cycles that impact climate. There is no such thing as "the climate cycle."

That 100,000-year figure sounds like one of the three Milankovic cycles. There's also Bond Cycles (1500 years), the solar cycle (variable, nine to 14 years), the Chandler wobble (3.5 and 7 years) and cycles produced by ocean circulations (North Atlantic Oscillation, Pacific Decadal Oscillation, El Nino Southern Oscillation, etc.). Lots of natural cycles have an impact.

The 30-year convention is just a measuring device needed because anything less than 30 years will not produce statistically sound results. It's a measuring device, not a natural cycle.

Doug

The 100,000 year cycle, is about what glacial periods ar apart. We are at thw peak of a warm cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who wants to be taken seriously in the "global warming" debate if they're floating the premise that it's man-made need to keep their focus on the real cause of the problem, human population growth.

A woman who has a few babies increases her carbon footprint by almost 40 times. If I stay single I can drive a semi to work, fart daily beefburgers into the atmosphere till the cows come home, crank the A/C up all year and leave a few thousand old fashioned lightbulbs on 24/7/365 and I won't even make the chart next to another mother plopping out another consumer of the environment.

Sorry alarmists, if global warming is an anthropogenic problem, the solution is shrinking the human population not buying energy saving light bulbs or a Toyota Prius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who wants to be taken seriously in the "global warming" debate if they're floating the premise that it's man-made need to keep their focus on the real cause of the problem, human population growth.

A woman who has a few babies increases her carbon footprint by almost 40 times. If I stay single I can drive a semi to work, fart daily beefburgers into the atmosphere till the cows come home, crank the A/C up all year and leave a few thousand old fashioned lightbulbs on 24/7/365 and I won't even make the chart next to another mother plopping out another consumer of the environment.

Sorry alarmists, if global warming is an anthropogenic problem, the solution is shrinking the human population not buying energy saving light bulbs or a Toyota Prius.

Switching lightbulbs and cars tends to be more socially acceptable than preventing people having kids or killing people off. And significantly less effort to enforce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry alarmists, if global warming is an anthropogenic problem, the solution is shrinking the human population not buying energy saving light bulbs or a Toyota Prius.

Surely you're not saying that if everyone switched to more efficient bulbs, cars, etc that it would have no positive impact? Rampant reproduction definitely causes a lot of different problems, but getting it under control is certainly not the only option in regards to human influenced climate change. That's a good thing too, since it would be one of the hardest world changes to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Global warming is the symptom - population explosion is the cause.

Fundamentally you can solve the first without addressing the second.

However I do not agree with Yamoto in his assessment of what been single and childless allows you to get away with.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry alarmists, if global warming is an anthropogenic problem, the solution is shrinking the human population not buying energy saving light bulbs or a Toyota Prius.

Buckminster Fuller figured out that human population growth is negatively related to industrialization. Since then, we've refined it a little more: industrialization results in educated women who can afford and know how to use contraceptrion. And that's your answer: educate women, give them equal rights and good paying jobs and population growth will take care of itself.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alocvhol fuels give off co2 when burnt in an engine.

Erlectric cars are powered off the grid. Meaning you just moved the tail pipe.

Hybrids, don't run long enough to make up for its co2 construction cost.

The metal in rechargeable batteries are toxic.

The energy saving light bulbs have toxic gas in them.

Nuclear power leaves toxic waste. How ever if we rycicled it there wouldn't be.

Windgmills kill birds and keep to much of the heat at ground level.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://theenergycollective.com/josephromm/202626/hot-water-global-warming-has-accelerated-past-15-years-new-study-oceans-confirms

"Completely contrary to the popular contrarian myth, global warming has accelerated, with more overall global warming in the past 15 years than the prior 15 years. This is because about 90% of overall global warming goes into heating the oceans, and the oceans have been warming dramatically."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.