• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

Global warming

Quietman

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
711
Points
18
Location
SW NH
As I always say, consider the source!! There is so much crap on the web that at first glance looks like it's reliable, but is just spamming, stinking, steaming, crap! Fox news is just barely above that, this site is much lower.
 

bdfreetuna

New member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Messages
4,300
Points
0
Location
keep the faith
Is planet warming? Slightly, but records only go back so far. It appears the 1930s were as warm or warmer than today before data tampering.

It also appears that warming has been limited to levels far below IPCC and other popularized climate models. Whereupon a clique of scientists once believed global warming would be a runaway "hockey stick" phenomenon, it now appears to be mediated either by 1) geologic feedback mechanisms or 2) simply false climate models.

It is known that global warming is more of a political issue, primarily pushed by the UN and others in favor of a global sustainable development framework; one that centralizes power and decision making by means of scientific technocracy and also redistributes wealth among nations through CO2 taxes, uneven implementation of environmental regulations, development guidelines and the like.

Personally I'm not worried about it. As far as Climate Depot goes, they're funded by oil companies. I don't think that's necessarily a 100% bad thing as they do seem to push out information regarding the large number of scientists that dissent from the popularized anthropogenic global warming theory that otherwise wouldn't be entertained in the liberal media.

Global warming theory has become dogma for many people mostly dependent on politics. I recognize that when people say "the science is settled", "the debate is over", and skeptical people and dissenting scientists are "deniers", that these folks are rushing to pull the wool over the masses to accomplish an agenda.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
27,921
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
Pretty much agree with you Tuna regarding the politics side of it.

I do think the science is settled that air/water pollution is bad for the world regardless of what the effect is on temperature/climate. I've got no problem with an agenda to make things cleaner, even if the economics of such isn't palatable in the short term.
 

bdfreetuna

New member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Messages
4,300
Points
0
Location
keep the faith
Oh I'm down with cleaning up air and water pollution.

Unfortunately I think many environmental "activist" organizations like Greenpeace are now getting their funding from the global warming politics side of things. It seems the entire environmental movement which I came to know and love in the 90s has been hijacked with this obsession on global warming.

Which, I can understand, if I thought the world was legitimately going to end I'd want to fight it too. And I believe they've played on people's fears and good intentions to shuttle regular environmentalists into the global warming camp. When the Earth is about to melt down and destroy all life -- obviously everything else can wait. Unfortunately *actual* environmental issues (and I say that as a serious skeptic regarding the seriousness of climate change) have gone to the wayside.

I'm an independent who voted Obama once, Jill Stein in 2012, and Trump in 2016. Not really a partisan I call it like I see it. I'm happy with an agenda to make things cleaner. But reducing CO2 doesn't do that. CO2 is not a pollutant. So why tax CO2? Plant some trees.

I believe the agenda is a lot more about global wealth redistribution, grants for the in group of researchers who tow the line, more power and influence for the UN.

Ultimately I'd like to see the USA become energy independent and I think this needs to happen whether or not we have a form of magical clean energy that can replace oil and coal. Nuclear worries me as well for different reasons. Consider myself an environmentalist still but not under false pretenses.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
27,921
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
Aren't pretty much all political agendas born on money grabs? Fear is the easiest way to motivate people. Those fighting the flip side of the global warming argument with environmentalist are equally as motivated by money, perhaps even more so.
 

bdfreetuna

New member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Messages
4,300
Points
0
Location
keep the faith
Sure but ultimately the truth isn't a subjective matter determined by money. Someone is right, the other is wrong, or no one is right, regardless.

My personal leaning is always to oppose political and social movements and err on the side of caution when a matter is in question. Let's make sure we've crossed those T's before we implement an agenda which affects the welfare of people in real ways. Let's make sure the agenda isn't based on an ideological preference, but results-driven and also agreeable to all parties involved.

If I believed a fire was truly spreading across the world at breakneck pace I might be inclined to throw caution to the wayside. But I don't.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
27,921
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
I can dig that, but I also don't think welfare of people is static. As an example, hundreds of thousands of people who worked for Kodak and Polaroid had their welfare turned upside down in a hurry due to obsolescence of those technologies. Individual people have a responsibility (to themselves and society) to be as forward thinking towards future opportunities as the governments that steer policy. If your job is going to be replaced by a robot, train yourself to build that robot.
 

benski

Active member
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
1,114
Points
36
Location
Binghamton NY
It's sad that global warming is denied despite the lack of exports and money to support it.
 

VTKilarney

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
5,552
Points
63
Location
VT NEK
I believe the scientific consensus that mankind is contributing to global warming. But I don't believe for a second that our models are nearly as accurate as the advocates would have you believe. I also believe that humans are very good at solving their way out of problems. (Food production, for example.).

For me, I'm all for reducing our reliance on oil - even for just political reasons. I can't stand it when global warming doomsayers also fight modern nuclear plants.
 

VTKilarney

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
5,552
Points
63
Location
VT NEK
Then again Brexit is even dumber.
We have a no political discussion rule here. This thread has skirted it, but your post is clearly over the line.

I would just point out that the markets don't share in your opinion. And this is coming from an EU citizen who has a lot to lose with Brexit as far as potential residence locations are concerned for myself and, more importantly, my children.
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
12,122
Points
113
Location
Wasatch Back
The earth has clearly been warming, but I have no idea if mankind is contributing to it or not.

Given how almost statistically improbably wrong the climate scientists models and predictions have been over the past 20'ish years, I believe the "I'm not sure" answer is clearly more logical than an arrogant, "yes", or uninformed, "no", answer.

The irony, however, is that if they're correct and its' man's fault, there's virtually nothing that can done about it anyway. Not unless you can perhaps somehow force every human being on planet earth to become a vegetarian. Most other "solutions" are akin to pissing in the ocean in an attempt to lower its' salinity, and that's IMO where the aforementioned "money grabs" in this subject tend to rear their heads - in the proposed "solutions" to "save" the earth.
 

NYDB

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
1,704
Points
113
Location
Southeast NY /Southern VT
We have a no political discussion rule here. This thread has skirted it, but your post is clearly over the line.

I would just point out that the markets don't share in your opinion. And this is coming from an EU citizen who has a lot to lose with Brexit as far as potential residence locations are concerned for myself and, more importantly, my children.

I think its more accurate to say 'some' markets don't share his opinion. Equities are up a bit, but the pound is down 20% against the dollar and 12% against the Euro since the Vote. Clearly holding the pound has been a big loser since the vote.
 

Rogman

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
190
Points
18
Location
Cape Cod
The threat is real. The science is solid. The disinformation has been effective.
 

bdfreetuna

New member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Messages
4,300
Points
0
Location
keep the faith
The science is solid.

Care to elaborate?

To make the opposite case I would start with 95-98% of IPCC computer models outpacing reality in terms of surface/satellite warming. Could also point to NOAA's historical temperature data adjustments resulting in an exaggerated warming trend -- whether or not this was the intent. And then a quick read up on ClimateGate will give some insight into the internal politics of climate science and silencing/blacklisting of dissenting views, which appear to be for more numerous than John Kerry or Al Gore would like us to believe.

All in all, we're talking 0.8 degrees celcius warming since 1850 -- and no warming in the last 20 years. Doesn't strike me as much of a threat.
 

VTKilarney

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
5,552
Points
63
Location
VT NEK
but the pound is down 20% against the dollar and 12% against the Euro since the Vote. Clearly holding the pound has been a big loser since the vote.
You are assuming that a lower pound is bad for everybody. That is simply not true. There are always both winners and losers when currency fluctuates.
 
Top