- Thread starter rrman61
- Start date
coonie minnie
Well-known Member
Had thunder and lightening the other night... not typical for a WI December. Ground finally has a couple inches of frost today, but no snow yet.
rustyfarmall
Well-known Member
Ain't the first time. Happened back in the mid '80s also. Trying to just get through with an 18 wheeler. It was not fun.
olgentdc
Well-known Member
everything s normal ,,. just out of control ,.been that way since the beginning of time
Blackhole49
Well-known Member
- Location
- White Lake MI
Can't spell the state you live in "c'mon man".
Glen SW Wi
Member
I remember that storm. I was going from Gulfport to Morgan City to go offshore. Truckers were complaining because of the pea gravel they put on the high bridge over the Mississippi river. Must have been three inches of the gravel.
tomstractorsandtoys
Well-known Member
I live in WI and I am a fan of global warming and the sooner the better. Tom
ITS TRUE ITS TRUE Some years back Time or Newsweek and others were warning us peasants of GLOBAL COOLING AND COMING OF THE ICE AGE It was a feature cover story !!!!!!!!!!!! Seeeeeeeeeeeee its coming true now and poor Algore and his cult followers and nature worshipers are having a nervous breakdown LOL
John T
John T
i live in Minnesota and I'm not a fan of global warming/global climate change. Our growing season is longer but the summer storms are much more fierce than they were 50 years ago. There are bugs that wouldn't have survived the past winters that are devastating certain variety of trees. Our winters have become much more pleasant but with less snow, snow that we need to replenish our ponds and streams. Snow to blanket and insulate the ground for overwintering crops. We need the cold to freeze down the swamps so the loggers can have access to the trees that need harvested. We really need to go back to the climate we had 60 years ago.
Russ from MN
Well-known Member
- Location
- Bemidji MN
Think about what you wrote! GLOBAL! Most of the globe is experiencing warmer weather! When the polar ice caps completely melt and your up to your a$$ in water you still wont believe it!
jimg.allentown
Well-known Member
You can believe anything that you like, BUT...
The Earth goes through cycles of weather. It has been since the beginning of time. It goes through times of tropical weather to ice ages. This has always been. Since before humans were on this Earth. The North and South poles have reversed many times over the ages. There have been many ice ages as well as warm periods.
Believing that humans are causing it or can control it is just outright ARROGANCE. We are simply not that powerful.
So, in order not to be a hypocrite, you can lead the way by not using any devices that are powered by outside energy. No cars, tractors, electronics, or trucks.
Also, stop burning fuel to heat your home. Live in a cave and use geothermal energy to keep from freezing.
While you are at it, have Al Gore stop flying around in a private jet to tell us that we are using too much energy. And tell him to turn off the lights. His electric bill for a single month is more than I use in a year. And tell him to park the Hummer as well.
The Earth goes through cycles of weather. It has been since the beginning of time. It goes through times of tropical weather to ice ages. This has always been. Since before humans were on this Earth. The North and South poles have reversed many times over the ages. There have been many ice ages as well as warm periods.
Believing that humans are causing it or can control it is just outright ARROGANCE. We are simply not that powerful.
So, in order not to be a hypocrite, you can lead the way by not using any devices that are powered by outside energy. No cars, tractors, electronics, or trucks.
Also, stop burning fuel to heat your home. Live in a cave and use geothermal energy to keep from freezing.
While you are at it, have Al Gore stop flying around in a private jet to tell us that we are using too much energy. And tell him to turn off the lights. His electric bill for a single month is more than I use in a year. And tell him to park the Hummer as well.
It's changed, stays warmer throughout fall into late fall. In the late 70's the starlings would be flocked up by the end of August, now it's December. We still get a harsh and long winter in some years, but many others have been mild. Whatever is going on, one can speculate, certainly seems different than it was for years.
Billy Shafer
Well-known Member
I recall sitting on a remote transmitter site. Dec 23rd it was 103. While on the radio people were yelling about global cooling and the new ice age. This was in 1980.
Goose
Well-known Member
I once wrote a term paper on climate change for a geology class.
I couldn't prove or disprove human activity being involved, but I did find from my research that at one time in the past the average temperature on Earth was some 14 degrees warmer than it is now. Also that if past patterns repeat, right now the Earth is nearing the end of a 10,000 year warming trend and within 2,000 years will enter a new small ice age. Also, the polar ice caps didn't even exist until a few million years ago.
Take the Earth as a whole. Subtract the 73% that's under water. Subtract the polar ice caps. Subtract the uninhabited/uninhabitable areas. Subtract the deserts. Subtract the wilderness areas. (The U.S. is 38% wilderness). Subtract the undeveloped countries that have no industry. The area that's left where human activity MIGHT affect climate is really very small.
To put it all into perspective, if the entire life of the planet Earth were compressed into one year, man's entire known history would begin at 3 seconds to midnight on December 31.
I couldn't prove or disprove human activity being involved, but I did find from my research that at one time in the past the average temperature on Earth was some 14 degrees warmer than it is now. Also that if past patterns repeat, right now the Earth is nearing the end of a 10,000 year warming trend and within 2,000 years will enter a new small ice age. Also, the polar ice caps didn't even exist until a few million years ago.
Take the Earth as a whole. Subtract the 73% that's under water. Subtract the polar ice caps. Subtract the uninhabited/uninhabitable areas. Subtract the deserts. Subtract the wilderness areas. (The U.S. is 38% wilderness). Subtract the undeveloped countries that have no industry. The area that's left where human activity MIGHT affect climate is really very small.
To put it all into perspective, if the entire life of the planet Earth were compressed into one year, man's entire known history would begin at 3 seconds to midnight on December 31.
blue_tractor_man
Member
If the ice caps melt the water won't come up an inch. Put an ice cube in a full glass of water and watch it melt. Plus if it gets warmer the atmosphere will hold more water. The whole global warming scare is designed to separate you from your money, land, and civil rights. Remember the glaciers used to come all the way south to Kentucky way before anyone burned any coal or gasoline.
Paul from MN
Member
rrman61, So based on it snowing today in Louisiana you have determined that global warming is a hoax. What do you believe when the temp is above normal?
Crazy Horse
Well-known Member
Good morning Russ ...... people believe what they WANT to believe unfortunately, despite scientific evidence to the contrary. It's all a conspiracy of course and 99% of those that really understand the situation are in on the hoax. Really, I think the only thing that might be at least slightly debatable is to what extent man's activities on the planet contribute to global warming. But to say it's not happening is sheer stupidity in my opinion. Most of us here on the YT site are not going to experience the consequences when they happen.
SodBuster87
Member
You know maybe global warming is happening. But then maybe it isnt. All I know is when these big celebrities burn energy like its going out of style with their big houses, big cars and private planes. All while preaching about energy conservation that us "peasants" must do, it does not help the cause.
Lumbersawyer
Member
- Location
- Grand Rapids, MN
I learned in grade school that the earth was about 3/4 ocean, 1/4th is land mass, how much of the seven continents have a permanent ice cap? Very little % . Greenland and Antarctica have the most. For the global warming crowd, their MATH just does not add up. The arctic ocean IS sea level and Ice takes up more volume than water, when it melts back as it does every year, does the ocean rise?
When I was young I worked for a farmer that during WW2 installed an air base in Greenland. They would dynamite the ice and use big Caterpillars to clear it away. He said that there were Trees under the ice where the air base was installed. At one time Greenland had trees!
The climate does seem to be different, but WE have had draught and floods since the beginning of time.
When I was young I worked for a farmer that during WW2 installed an air base in Greenland. They would dynamite the ice and use big Caterpillars to clear it away. He said that there were Trees under the ice where the air base was installed. At one time Greenland had trees!
The climate does seem to be different, but WE have had draught and floods since the beginning of time.
The earth is a living breathing planet.The earth's climate has been changing since 'day one'.Hot,cold. Ice ages and hot spells. meteors hitting the planet........Mankind has little to no effect. Climate will continue to fluctuate long after man is eztinct."Global warming" may be happening. But not by the hand of mankind.
Crazy Horse
Well-known Member
Well MB, I guess that's the last word on the subject then ...... discussion over !!!
retired farmer
Well-known Member
Google 'government weather control'.
Deutz Lover
Member
There is still a lot of argument among scientists which is good because it shows that everyone does not follow in lockstep. The fact is that as the concerned scientists examine the evidence more and more agree that there is planetary warming.
1. Carbon dioxide levels are rising. One of the biggest dangers is that it dissolves in water more than most gases and makes the oceans more acidic. A lot of marine organisms have calcium carbonate as part of their exoskeletons such as clams, oysters, etc. The more acidic the water the more difficult it is to form exoskeletons and shells and will also dissolve them much like vinegar will dissolve the shell off of a chicken egg.
A similar example is stalagmite and stalactite formation in limestone caves with dripping water. If you have drip irrigation your emitters will slowly clog with calcium carbonate if the water comes from a limestone aquifer. The source water has to be acidified to dissolve it and keep it from happening. Look at the coral reefs across the world as they slowly dissolve.
In my opinion the earth cannot sustain a human population of much over 500 million to one billion and beyond this is deficit spending.
That is just one area to observe. Predictive science does not say there will be warming everywhere but sporadic changes in weather patterns. We have had three severe landfall hurricanes this year, but only time will tell if it will continue this way.
It does not matter if it is totally man made, but there is no need to contribute to it by using fossil fuels and not develop alternate energy sources.
There are also health considerations. Burning coal releases mercury and other heavy metals into the atmosphere. The runoff from rains contains these and they end up in the soil and eventually in the streams, rivers, and oceans. Eaten any swordfish lately?
Your can deny science all you want, but in order to disprove this you need to check historically back over many many years and millennia in soils, rocks, and old ice plus permafrost to check what was already here globally. So far what has been checked tends to verify man made contaminates raising these levels. Many scientists (by that I don't mean one) do this not to prove man's impact, but to verify it. They are being objective not subjective and are just checking facts. Science is self-correcting. There is no major conspiracy among them.
1. Carbon dioxide levels are rising. One of the biggest dangers is that it dissolves in water more than most gases and makes the oceans more acidic. A lot of marine organisms have calcium carbonate as part of their exoskeletons such as clams, oysters, etc. The more acidic the water the more difficult it is to form exoskeletons and shells and will also dissolve them much like vinegar will dissolve the shell off of a chicken egg.
A similar example is stalagmite and stalactite formation in limestone caves with dripping water. If you have drip irrigation your emitters will slowly clog with calcium carbonate if the water comes from a limestone aquifer. The source water has to be acidified to dissolve it and keep it from happening. Look at the coral reefs across the world as they slowly dissolve.
In my opinion the earth cannot sustain a human population of much over 500 million to one billion and beyond this is deficit spending.
That is just one area to observe. Predictive science does not say there will be warming everywhere but sporadic changes in weather patterns. We have had three severe landfall hurricanes this year, but only time will tell if it will continue this way.
It does not matter if it is totally man made, but there is no need to contribute to it by using fossil fuels and not develop alternate energy sources.
There are also health considerations. Burning coal releases mercury and other heavy metals into the atmosphere. The runoff from rains contains these and they end up in the soil and eventually in the streams, rivers, and oceans. Eaten any swordfish lately?
Your can deny science all you want, but in order to disprove this you need to check historically back over many many years and millennia in soils, rocks, and old ice plus permafrost to check what was already here globally. So far what has been checked tends to verify man made contaminates raising these levels. Many scientists (by that I don't mean one) do this not to prove man's impact, but to verify it. They are being objective not subjective and are just checking facts. Science is self-correcting. There is no major conspiracy among them.
Thomasthetankengine
Member
Me too. Here in New England the glaciers brought all the stones in our fields. I?m afraid they might come back with another load😳
dr sportster
Well-known Member
I always measured the ice thickness for the town for kids to skate. !960s was 7 inch thick . You could drive tractors on the ice to clear snow. Since the late 1980s the same pond doesn't freeze. Somewhere in here is a fact that it got warmer. Incidents of ice fishermen drowning greatly increased.
erskine2017
Member
This is a tractor forum! Please keep uninformed political comments to yourself. You should consider a remedial spelling course before you tackle something as complex as climate change.
Gary Mitchell
Well-known Member
The guy that wrote that didn't even know where the sun went at night.
I probably wouldn't trust him much for atmospheric information. gm
I probably wouldn't trust him much for atmospheric information. gm
its all political nonsense for politicians to get more money and more control.
ya the earth could be warming a bit thru a cycle but its been warming and cooling forever and will continue to do so forever (our perspective of forever).
they cannot predict with 100% accuracy a 5 day forecast. how do they pretend to know the "GLOBAL" temperature increase of 1 deg in 30 years?????
the Lions had gore talk at the convention in Chicago in July. He talked about the climate but He NEVER, NEVER mentioned the word carbon once. NOT once. he shifted his global warming to industrial thermal pollution.
the only way i see for man to influence the planet's temperature IF (i don't believe) but IF its due to man would be for us to do away with 1/2-2/3 of the current population because we would have to live like the early settlers, very primitive, no tractors, cars , hospitals, no electric, ect ect which would mean we could only produce a small amount of food and if we only live in southern climates so we wouldn't have to burn anything for any heat and add to the atmosphere. maybe... just maybe we could influence the climate. maybe... probably not...
ya the earth could be warming a bit thru a cycle but its been warming and cooling forever and will continue to do so forever (our perspective of forever).
they cannot predict with 100% accuracy a 5 day forecast. how do they pretend to know the "GLOBAL" temperature increase of 1 deg in 30 years?????
the Lions had gore talk at the convention in Chicago in July. He talked about the climate but He NEVER, NEVER mentioned the word carbon once. NOT once. he shifted his global warming to industrial thermal pollution.
the only way i see for man to influence the planet's temperature IF (i don't believe) but IF its due to man would be for us to do away with 1/2-2/3 of the current population because we would have to live like the early settlers, very primitive, no tractors, cars , hospitals, no electric, ect ect which would mean we could only produce a small amount of food and if we only live in southern climates so we wouldn't have to burn anything for any heat and add to the atmosphere. maybe... just maybe we could influence the climate. maybe... probably not...
Gary Mitchell
Well-known Member
Well now Tom, you could always donate them for the "wall?" gm ;-)
jay-eye-see
Member
I dont trust much of what the right says.
Yes I realize how unpopular that statement will be among this crowd.
Yes I realize how unpopular that statement will be among this crowd.
Brown Swiss
Well-known Member
Oh this is tractor related, my tractors and equipment have to be out in the climate change when I use them! I didn't realize climate change was complex, just the goofy people who believe in this sort of thing are complex.
Folks, the recent environmental hysteria, global warming, climate change, or whatever it is currently called, is nothing more than a pagan religion, i.e., the latest rendition of Gaia, Mother Nature, or whatever it is currently called or will be called tomorrow or next year.
It's really rather entertaining to watch the nonsense from a historical perspective.
Dean
It's really rather entertaining to watch the nonsense from a historical perspective.
Dean
Brown Swiss
Well-known Member
You know when the dinosaurs roamed the earth there was no snow and ice on any part of the earth, and they roamed for what 160 million years? Also it has been said that the earth has been froze over twice in its life time. This was before humans went and started global warming, or now climate change! If you are going to look at the big picture, then look at the entire past!
Global warming is the biggest and most expensive lie ever perpetuated upon the majority of the world's people by those who want nothing more but to rule us all like serfs. Unfortunately, this global cabal has
Tens of millions of dependent, compliant sheep in the USA and every other Western nation who are more than willing to be lorded over by these deep state jackals and whom actively vote to promote the agenda.
Tens of millions of dependent, compliant sheep in the USA and every other Western nation who are more than willing to be lorded over by these deep state jackals and whom actively vote to promote the agenda.
gtractorfan
Well-known Member
The sky is falling? Reminds me over 40 years ago a President told us we're running out of oil and there were lines at (rationed?) gas stations. Now there are oil tank car trains going by us daily. The trains are a mile or more long and often several of them a day. We're becoming one of the world's largest exporters of oil.
rlp in Co.
Well-known Member
They found fossils of alligators and frogs in Barrow Alaska!
The climate change crowd want to separate you from your money and make you a slave. The crazy thing is, some people are easily fooled and it seems that the younger generation have been brainwashed and facts mean nothing to them. Not all of them, but most of them. It is their religion. The scary thing is; they are willing to murder the unbelievers.
The climate change crowd want to separate you from your money and make you a slave. The crazy thing is, some people are easily fooled and it seems that the younger generation have been brainwashed and facts mean nothing to them. Not all of them, but most of them. It is their religion. The scary thing is; they are willing to murder the unbelievers.
You know Deutz Lover I was thinking about this very thing this morning. At the time that WWII occurred the world had to be warmer because we, the USA, sent a flight of P-38s to Europe to assist fight Hitler. That flight had mechanical trouble and landed in MEADOW in Greenland. Seem after fixing their problem they couldn't take-off due to inclement weather and finally our Air Corp sent something that got them home but left the planes there. In the 1990's a group of plane enthusiast went to get one of those planes--it was under 30 feet of snow and ice.
Now if prior to WWII that meadow was nice and green and today it's covered with 30 feet of snow and ice the world must have cooled a bit. So when that meadow melts the world will be at the temperature our fathers and grandfathers grew up in. AND that should take what 100 years from green to ice and back to green.
Now if prior to WWII that meadow was nice and green and today it's covered with 30 feet of snow and ice the world must have cooled a bit. So when that meadow melts the world will be at the temperature our fathers and grandfathers grew up in. AND that should take what 100 years from green to ice and back to green.
On the sea level change side
"Ruairi
December 9, 2017 at 6:27 am ? Reply
A fast rising sea is a must.
For alarmists who tweak and adjust,
Making past records trend,
Like the hockey-stick bend,
Which skeptics worldwide do not trust."
From the resident rhymester at
http://joannenova.com.au/2017/12/rising-sea-levels-in-the-indian-ocean-due-to-man-made-adjustments-not-co2/
Along with the article and other comments
"Ruairi
December 9, 2017 at 6:27 am ? Reply
A fast rising sea is a must.
For alarmists who tweak and adjust,
Making past records trend,
Like the hockey-stick bend,
Which skeptics worldwide do not trust."
From the resident rhymester at
http://joannenova.com.au/2017/12/rising-sea-levels-in-the-indian-ocean-due-to-man-made-adjustments-not-co2/
Along with the article and other comments
Deutz Lover
Member
The issues should not be politicized for several main reasons. They all end up being greed no matter which you believe in.
1. Some want to continue as is because the have vested financial interest in certain fossil fuels such as coal. This may be in the form of stocks or companies that deal with or related to coal especially, but other fossil fuels.
2. There are people and companies that want to profit on the other end by offering technologies that beyond expensive and don't necessarily help the problem if it exists.
3. There are countries that want to everyone else to pay for their carbon footprints. If this is so no one is innocent going back 3000 years.
Try to bill the trillions of bacteria and fungi, plankton, animals and plants that release carbon dioxide, and methane.
This is why politics should be excluded to keep out pork barrel politics and worse. It distorts objectivity.
Yes there has been changing climate since life came to be on this earth, but it is not change, but the rate of change that is disturbing. The only thing that has caused more rapid change were natural events such as eruptions of super volcanoes and major asteroid/comet strikes. Even the eruptions of regular volcanoes caused temporary climate changes, but were not extinction level events.
If the planet is warming regardless of the cause species will die off because they cannot adapt fast enough or migrate to a livable area. Species died off when extinction level events did occur, but some species survived. Mankind might also have a limited existence. No matter what, the earth will survive and eventually recover whatever recover means. Who or what survives is still in question. Ask me in 100,000 years.
1. Some want to continue as is because the have vested financial interest in certain fossil fuels such as coal. This may be in the form of stocks or companies that deal with or related to coal especially, but other fossil fuels.
2. There are people and companies that want to profit on the other end by offering technologies that beyond expensive and don't necessarily help the problem if it exists.
3. There are countries that want to everyone else to pay for their carbon footprints. If this is so no one is innocent going back 3000 years.
Try to bill the trillions of bacteria and fungi, plankton, animals and plants that release carbon dioxide, and methane.
This is why politics should be excluded to keep out pork barrel politics and worse. It distorts objectivity.
Yes there has been changing climate since life came to be on this earth, but it is not change, but the rate of change that is disturbing. The only thing that has caused more rapid change were natural events such as eruptions of super volcanoes and major asteroid/comet strikes. Even the eruptions of regular volcanoes caused temporary climate changes, but were not extinction level events.
If the planet is warming regardless of the cause species will die off because they cannot adapt fast enough or migrate to a livable area. Species died off when extinction level events did occur, but some species survived. Mankind might also have a limited existence. No matter what, the earth will survive and eventually recover whatever recover means. Who or what survives is still in question. Ask me in 100,000 years.
Crazy Horse
Well-known Member
Deutz Lover ..... without even meeting you, I will state that you are much brighter than the average YT'er by a good number of IQ points.
The bottom line IMHO is that global warming is in fact happening, period, no argument. If it happened in the past, that has nothing to do
with it. If there have been cooling trends and ice ages, so what? We must concern ourselves with what is currently happening and we can't
hope for another cooling period to start up in 10,000 years. If man is currently contributing to it, that's not a good thing and we should
do all we can to slow it down and maybe even stop it (which is doubtful).
The bottom line IMHO is that global warming is in fact happening, period, no argument. If it happened in the past, that has nothing to do
with it. If there have been cooling trends and ice ages, so what? We must concern ourselves with what is currently happening and we can't
hope for another cooling period to start up in 10,000 years. If man is currently contributing to it, that's not a good thing and we should
do all we can to slow it down and maybe even stop it (which is doubtful).
brutus49DC
Member
Most of the jokers on here can't even spell easy words or write a sentence with proper grammar but yet are self proclaimed climate experts.
that would be true if the polar icecaps were floating on water, only the ice in the Arctic Ocean is floating , Ice in Greenland is a mile thick, ice on the Antarctic continent its thicker.
geological evidence shows that if ALL the ice were to melt, seawater levels would rise approx 275 feet higher than they are today
when glaciers were as far south as kentucky, seal levels were nearly 300 feet lower than they are today, Long Island, NY is a glacial moraine and was part of the mainland and not an island
The Famous Grouse
Member
What you're describing is weather, not climate.
Weather is what's happening out your window today. Climate is what's happening over a broad area and over a long period of time.
Climate change will affect different areas differently. Some areas may actually become cooler even as the global climate warms. This is why it's more accurately called climate change.
Being that a lot of LA is about 5/8 inch above sea level as it is, if it were me living down there, I'd not find it a joking matter.
Grouse
Deutz Lover
Member
After having said what I did previously, I feel it necessary to add a little more information.
There is some evidence that the Sun is entering a period of reduced solar sunspot activity which will result in a cooling period.
This would slow some warming, but it will not last. You will have to look it up to understand its significance. See: Maunder Minimum. Some experts have dismissed its overall long term effect.
I had to look hard at the data to accept the current data on climate change and accept it reluctantly. I am still looking and hoping for some overlooked valid explanations similar to the Maunder Minimum and Solar Maximum and I hope the consensus is incorrect.
Crazy Horse,
I do not consider myself much higher in IQ than others. I just happen to know some people a lot smarter than myself and I probably have a little more background in analytical science. There are those at YT who can run rings around me in subjects of their particular interests.
There is some evidence that the Sun is entering a period of reduced solar sunspot activity which will result in a cooling period.
This would slow some warming, but it will not last. You will have to look it up to understand its significance. See: Maunder Minimum. Some experts have dismissed its overall long term effect.
I had to look hard at the data to accept the current data on climate change and accept it reluctantly. I am still looking and hoping for some overlooked valid explanations similar to the Maunder Minimum and Solar Maximum and I hope the consensus is incorrect.
Crazy Horse,
I do not consider myself much higher in IQ than others. I just happen to know some people a lot smarter than myself and I probably have a little more background in analytical science. There are those at YT who can run rings around me in subjects of their particular interests.
Human-induced global warming falls in the purview of science not politics. The green house effect is a long-understood phenomena, first described in the 19th century. Carbon dioxide is a product of combustion and an effective green house gas. Over the past 200 years, since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the burning of fossil fuels has raised earth's atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration to a level that hasn't been seen for millions of years. As a result the heat trapped in earth's atmosphere is causing a rise in global temperature, melting of the ice caps, rise in sea levels, changes in weather patterns and more extreme weather events.
Those items in the sentences above are called facts. They are the products of broad scientific consensus bolstered by theories, experiment and observations. They cannot be refuted by what one "believes", "thinks" or "wishes". However, there are solutions for avoiding the worst-case outcomes of global warming. To avoid a future for our children and grandchildren that isn't plagued with mass extinction and the mass-migrations of displaced people the one thing that we can all do is vote for and elect leaders who respect and listen to science. Ignoring science and eschewing facts is a dangerous path and an outright disregard for those who will be here when we are gone.
Those items in the sentences above are called facts. They are the products of broad scientific consensus bolstered by theories, experiment and observations. They cannot be refuted by what one "believes", "thinks" or "wishes". However, there are solutions for avoiding the worst-case outcomes of global warming. To avoid a future for our children and grandchildren that isn't plagued with mass extinction and the mass-migrations of displaced people the one thing that we can all do is vote for and elect leaders who respect and listen to science. Ignoring science and eschewing facts is a dangerous path and an outright disregard for those who will be here when we are gone.
If there were 200 years of hard data which supposedly supports the global warming theory that period
would still amount to less than one flap of a flys wing in earths history. And why were the alarmists
screaming ice age as recently as the seventies? Could it be because they have no real clue? Regard for
those we leave behind should start, or at least extend to not electing radicals who run up 20 trillion
dollars debts in the name of largely discredited psuedo-science. Another little known fact, a sustained
increase of just 1% in worldwide grassland cover would be capable of absorbing and converting all of the
Co2 produced by man in our recorded history.
would still amount to less than one flap of a flys wing in earths history. And why were the alarmists
screaming ice age as recently as the seventies? Could it be because they have no real clue? Regard for
those we leave behind should start, or at least extend to not electing radicals who run up 20 trillion
dollars debts in the name of largely discredited psuedo-science. Another little known fact, a sustained
increase of just 1% in worldwide grassland cover would be capable of absorbing and converting all of the
Co2 produced by man in our recorded history.
Logan in SE Texas
Member
But, but, but.... the ice caps have GROWN in the past 2-3 years. Using non-biased temp records there has a 15+ year cooling period. Also 15-20 years ago algore was claiming that the polar ice caps would be
completely GONE in 10 yrs. I am steadfastly what you would call a climate change denier. The science is NOT settled!
completely GONE in 10 yrs. I am steadfastly what you would call a climate change denier. The science is NOT settled!
Stephen Newell
Well-known Member
The problem with that thought is global warming began 50,000 years ago. The fact is this planet naturally runs through cycles and what people do may only affect that in such a slight amount you couldn't measure it. Personally I think if people are affecting global warming it's every square foot of asphalt, concrete, rooftop and everything sitting in the sun reflecting heat from the sun. I think the car is doing more to add to global warming sitting in the driveway not running than anything it produces running. Man made global warming is a ruse to send manufacturing jobs to China.
I agree with your first sentence. The problem is that it IS in the purview of politics whether we like it or not. There are enormous amounts of money involved on both sides of the issue and massive lobbying on both sides too. When data is massaged, falsified or misrepresented in either direction there's a problem. Thats where we stand today- wondering who's lying to whom and whats real or fake. Myself, I'm all sustainability and conservation...within limits. I'm not turning off the electricity or taking a horse to town.
Actually, if things stay on their present course there's a fair chance Kim Jun Crazy will solve the over population crisis for us. :shock:
Deutz Lover
Member
I would like to point out just one general comment to demonstrate how to look at information objectively and not swallow everything wholesale.
There is a general comment that the polar ice caps are growing.
Let's look at the sources of these comments. Most of the quotes are from non-government sites and nonscientific sources and tell only part of the story.
Some more current information comes from a NASA site dated March 7, 2017. The scientists reporting the information are doing just that. They are reporting it regardless of the outcome. Access to all of this information is essential, but obtaining some it has become problematic this year.
Some sites generalize and say the ice caps are growing. This is incorrect. A columnist at Forbes for instance says ice caps are growing, but the article was written in May 19, 2015. The NASA report says that the Antarctic sea ice has been slowly expanding, but this year decreased dramatically for the first time since 1981.
The combined Arctic and Antarctic sea ice area shows shrinkage for the years 1981-2017.
Go to the NASA site and look at the graphs. There are other factors at work than just melting such as amount of moisture in the air and changes in the winds at each pole. Interpret the data yourself. Don't let me or anyone else do it.
Now look at the graph from NASA's GRACE satellites. It shows not area, but mass. It shows ice mass variations in Antarctica dating back to 2002 when the satellites were launched. From the graph you can see an ice mass loss for those years. There is also an ice mass graph for Greenland which covers those years. Observe these and make your own conclusions.
...
There is a general comment that the polar ice caps are growing.
Let's look at the sources of these comments. Most of the quotes are from non-government sites and nonscientific sources and tell only part of the story.
Some more current information comes from a NASA site dated March 7, 2017. The scientists reporting the information are doing just that. They are reporting it regardless of the outcome. Access to all of this information is essential, but obtaining some it has become problematic this year.
Some sites generalize and say the ice caps are growing. This is incorrect. A columnist at Forbes for instance says ice caps are growing, but the article was written in May 19, 2015. The NASA report says that the Antarctic sea ice has been slowly expanding, but this year decreased dramatically for the first time since 1981.
The combined Arctic and Antarctic sea ice area shows shrinkage for the years 1981-2017.
Go to the NASA site and look at the graphs. There are other factors at work than just melting such as amount of moisture in the air and changes in the winds at each pole. Interpret the data yourself. Don't let me or anyone else do it.
Now look at the graph from NASA's GRACE satellites. It shows not area, but mass. It shows ice mass variations in Antarctica dating back to 2002 when the satellites were launched. From the graph you can see an ice mass loss for those years. There is also an ice mass graph for Greenland which covers those years. Observe these and make your own conclusions.
...
But who do you trust? NOAA got caught red handed changing previous data to bolster a warming trend argument. Thats the problem- people have jobs and careers that depend on this being an important, perhaps extinction level, crisis. Scientists need to eat and clothe their families and the bigger the crisis, the bigger the grants and paycheck. They are only human after all. That throws a wrench into it. They aren't saints. They have their agendas too and the climate change industry has grown like wildfire since the 90's. You can't ignore that.
kcm.MN
Well-known Member
- Location
- NW Minnesota
Deutz Lover
Member
Bret2407,
Scientists can be a competitive lot and sometimes get into heated arguments over technique, methods, and interpretation. That is why there is a peer review process for publication in scientific journals.
Research has to stand up to scrutiny from other scientists and has to be repeatable and verifiable. If you are talking about the Karl and Bates dispute involving NOAA data collection it was apparently much ado about nothing.
At a House science committee hearing, Rush Holt, CEO of AAAS (publisher of the respected journal Science and ScienceInsider) stood by the 2015 paper. "This is not the making of a big scandal—this is an internal dispute between two factions within an agency," he said.
The NOAA data has been verified by independent studies.
Again read the articles and draw your own conclusions.
No, scientists are not saints, but they are held to certain professional standards by colleagues. Government and university scientists generally could make a lot more money working for private industry.
Scientists can be a competitive lot and sometimes get into heated arguments over technique, methods, and interpretation. That is why there is a peer review process for publication in scientific journals.
Research has to stand up to scrutiny from other scientists and has to be repeatable and verifiable. If you are talking about the Karl and Bates dispute involving NOAA data collection it was apparently much ado about nothing.
At a House science committee hearing, Rush Holt, CEO of AAAS (publisher of the respected journal Science and ScienceInsider) stood by the 2015 paper. "This is not the making of a big scandal—this is an internal dispute between two factions within an agency," he said.
The NOAA data has been verified by independent studies.
Again read the articles and draw your own conclusions.
No, scientists are not saints, but they are held to certain professional standards by colleagues. Government and university scientists generally could make a lot more money working for private industry.
I don't know if it's the same event. This is what I was talking about-http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/noaa-fiddles-with-climate-data-to-erase-the-15-year-global-warming-hiatus/
Regardless of what the defenders of NOAA say, the event you refer to doesn't appear to be "much ado about nothing to me. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444942/john-bates-whistleblower-climate-scientist-smeared-global-warming-advocates
There's no such thing as "settled science", just settled opinion.
ptfarmer
Well-known Member
- Location
- San Antonio, Tx
We got snow Thursday evening, and all the weather organizations didn't even mention the slight possibility of snow could happen. I don't trust any of them, also the climate change debate helps all those people "studying" it to keep their jobs so it's not going to go away on that front either.
Johnnykick
Member
Here's the story. I'm a retire USAF Weather Forecaster and this has always been a hobby to follow this narrative. https://iseethics.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/the-cooling-world-newsweek-april-28-1975.pdf
Drink up fellas, the koolaid is fresh!
The EPA's many scientist they keep quoting? Go look it up, wasn't very many at all that said global warming was caused by man. Kinda like their justification for forcing the tier4 standards on diesels. They kept claiming that "many children died becsue of diesel particulate matter in the 50's and 60's". First place they offer no autopsy reports at all to back that claim up. 2nd thing is that diesels were not very common in the 50's and 60's. Heck through most of the 60's you could still buy farm tractors in the 80-90 PTO HP range in gas. The 4020 JD, IH 806, Case 930 and other were all available in gas. Most medium duty trucks were gas too. So where was all this diesel particulate matter coming from?
Another thing to consider. 3rd world countries are polluting like mad. Yet the 1st Kato agreement and now the Paris accords do little to nothing about that but put economy killing restrictions on countries that already are working at reducing pollution? This isn't about climate change. This is all about "one world". They believe that to make the one world concept work everyone has to have the same standard of living.
Follow the trial of either money or power........
Rick
The EPA's many scientist they keep quoting? Go look it up, wasn't very many at all that said global warming was caused by man. Kinda like their justification for forcing the tier4 standards on diesels. They kept claiming that "many children died becsue of diesel particulate matter in the 50's and 60's". First place they offer no autopsy reports at all to back that claim up. 2nd thing is that diesels were not very common in the 50's and 60's. Heck through most of the 60's you could still buy farm tractors in the 80-90 PTO HP range in gas. The 4020 JD, IH 806, Case 930 and other were all available in gas. Most medium duty trucks were gas too. So where was all this diesel particulate matter coming from?
Another thing to consider. 3rd world countries are polluting like mad. Yet the 1st Kato agreement and now the Paris accords do little to nothing about that but put economy killing restrictions on countries that already are working at reducing pollution? This isn't about climate change. This is all about "one world". They believe that to make the one world concept work everyone has to have the same standard of living.
Follow the trial of either money or power........
Rick
Similar threads
We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.
Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.
Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy