Off the wall global warming thought.

I've thought that the global warming treaties were not in the best interest of the US and other developed nations for a long time. Leading me to think that they really have little to do with global warming and more to do with globalization.

If global warming is such threat to the earth and man kind would it not make more sense to stop manufacturing in 3 rd world countries with few if any environmental regulations and move said manufacturing into countries what have well established environmental rules and regulation? Do that instead of shutting down manufacturing in low polluting countries?

Rick

I enjoy your contributions around here, but I have found we often are nearly opposites on some of our views of things.....

In this case, I completely agree with you.

Perhaps one of use should be worried?

I mean all this lighthearted, but I do agree with you here.

Paul

That was exactly the reason for moving the plants to those countries to circumvent the requirements. Also to reduce the costs of those regulations,with cheaper labor.

This obviously will become a political post as comments are added.....

An issue too is the illegal immigrant issues. Clearly both political parties want the status quo, as it allows for a cheap labor force. Slaves, is what it is. Those folk come here and do the dirty work, and have to hide from everyone, so they are forced to stay outside the lines, are subject to poor working conditions.

It is unbelievable the American public supports this. I think it is the travesty of our country for the past 50 years.

There are so many things wrong with intentionally creating this second class work force.

It is really a similar issue to the political version of global warming.

I'm not trying to single out any one party or group and I'm not at all opposed to expanding legal visas and legal immigration programs to bring people openly into this country to contribute to our society. These would be good and noble things. Lawful immigration is a cornerstone of how this country was founded.

The current system supported by both major parties is a travesty.

And native Americans likely have some differening thoughts on this.......

Paul

Yes, Native Americans are a perfect example of their failure to control immigration!

Immigrants have been at the bottom of the ladder a lot more than 50 years, more like a few hundred, it?s called earning your way. Someone moves to the US for a better life, they should have to earn it, nothing wrong that. All other groups worked upwards, Irish, French, etc, why should the ones these days get special treatment?

I understand, yes.

My point is there should be legal avenues for that to happen. In the past boatloads of folk were processed into this country and given papers and given a hard life, as part of this country, and allowed to sink or swim.

The current way of folks just jumping across the border and allowed to exist here under the radar but not be a part of 'here' is a bad situation keeping those folk from ever having the chance to move up and become a part of 'here.'

There are many differences from 200 years ago and now, with society, with our land mass vs our population and on and on, so the rules will be different.

But we need an orderly and on the books way to allow folks to immigrate here, and be a part of 'here.'

The current situation is grossly unfair to everyone, mostly so against those jumping the borders.

Paul

I don't usually comment on the environmental posts but a now retired friend of mine was an engineer with a large USA multinational
chemical company and he was directly involved in plant design and implementation. The following is a quote from him: "It takes
over 10 years to put a shovel in the ground to build a new plant in North America and in India or China the local construction
companies ask "when do you want it in production?""
The CEOs/CFOs of these large companies always favor third world countries as labor costs are considerably less so the profits are
larger and their bonuses are larger. Always about $$$ not about quality or what is good for the North American people.

JimB

"Global Warming", "Global Cooling", Global Climate Change", and most anything of the sort has mostly to do with political $$$'s. It's a sort of game, if you will, where some people who are very good at the game use it to get ahead in life, make connections.....get things done! Get '[i:31706520cd]what[/i:31706520cd]' done, you ask? Doesn't matter! Just have to be productive! We'll figure out the details when we need to....in the field.

Sorry, I'm watching a funny movie right now. Just happens to go along with this thought of Global Warming.....or Global ANYTHING. There's a LOT(!!!!!!) of behind-the-scenes shenanigans that go on, and this movie just happens to do an amazing (and hilarious) job at helping the common layman understand "How Things Work".

The movie is called "The Pentagon Wars":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir0FAa8P2MU

JMOR ...... I think your comment slipped by without notice ...... I got it though ..... good post !!!

the way i understand this emission-pollution thingg to supposedly curtail global warming is that each country gets a certain number of permits.
the non industrialized nations can sell their credits to heavily industrialized nations. it doesnt seem to cut emmisions, just shifts money from one
country to another.

The people you seem to be identifying as being wronged are in reality criminals who have broken our laws by entering our country illegally and whose actions directly threaten our national sovereignty. Those people have no right to a chance to become US citizens, that is a privilege which is supposed to be reserved for those who follow our laws.

you tell them . LAA

Thanks Paul.

Guys look are some responses here.

If big business was a fault they would be 100% behind the Climate Change movement. The party that's really pushing this would be their party! That party would drop support like a hot rock too because "it's hurting the little people".

Rick

Global warming is true just not the cause. I have a nephew who is about as left wing as you can go. lets
just say he is a professional college student carries a 4.0 average. He was all about global warming, I
told him to do his own study. So he did, He found out that the earth has been Ice Cap free more that it's
had Ice Caps. In other words it's a natural occurance and has happened many times throughout history.

I'm at the age now where I need to worry more about avoiding the Heat in the next World and less about the heat in this one.

(quoted from post at 19:21:17 07/06/18) I've thought that the global warming treaties were not in the best interest of the US and other developed nations for a long time. Leading me to think that they really have little to do with global warming and more to do with globalization.

If global warming is such threat to the earth and man kind would it not make more sense to stop manufacturing in 3 rd world countries with few if any environmental regulations and move said manufacturing into countries what have well established environmental rules and regulation? Do that instead of shutting down manufacturing in low polluting countries?

Rick

Click to expand...

All that will change now that environmental regulations have been rolled back. If wages can be lowered in this country manufacturers will be heading back into the U.S. real soon.

If global whatever you want to call it means clean water to drink and clean air to breath, I'm all for it.

(quoted from post at 15:13:06 07/06/18) Global warming is true just not the cause. I have a nephew who is about as left wing as you can go. lets
just say he is a professional college student carries a 4.0 average. He was all about global warming, I
told him to do his own study. So he did, He found out that the earth has been Ice Cap free more that it's
had Ice Caps. In other words it's a natural occurance and has happened many times throughout history.

Click to expand...

I think most of us on here know that, but I just had that off the wall thought.

Rick

(quoted from post at 21:55:46 07/06/18) The people you seem to be identifying as being wronged are in reality criminals who have broken our laws by entering our country illegally and whose actions directly threaten our national sovereignty. Those people have no right to a chance to become US citizens, that is a privilege which is supposed to be reserved for those who follow our laws.

Click to expand...

What are the laws for immigration into this country? I keep hearing about these laws immigrants are supposed to follow when trying to come to this country to live, but no one seems to know how they are supposed to work.

When my great-great grandfather came to this country he made his way across Europe, from Bavaria, to Belgium. From there he boarded a ship that sailed across the Atlantic ocean and landed in Louisiana. Then he made his way up the Mississippi river and stopped at Potosi, Wisconsin. He made his way a little farther bought some land and started farming. He did obtain citizenship about ten years later. It was a lot easier to move to this country in the old days. Why should it be so much harder now?

Because they come here and don?t pay income taxes then
send all the money back to Mexico for there families now do
you get it ? Your grandpa camt to work and build up the
country not sponge off it .

LF ..... wages rolled back? So your boss calls you into his office and says, "Hey Mr. Fure, your $25 per hour job on that assembly line is
gonna stay so don't worry about your job, but we're now gonna pay you only $7 per hour". That's almost laughable and it ain't gonna happen.
I'm with you though on your water and air comment though.

(quoted from post at 00:56:25 07/07/18) LF ..... wages rolled back? So your boss calls you into his office and says, "Hey Mr. Fure, your $25 per hour job on that assembly line is
gonna stay so don't worry about your job, but we're now gonna pay you only $7 per hour". That's almost laughable and it ain't gonna happen.
I'm with you though on your water and air comment though.

Click to expand...

Wasn't one of the reasons manufacturing jobs left this country was because of lower labor cost? No one wants to work cheap, that's the foreign countries privilege.

+1

On the immigration issue. Try getting into the US legally coming from lets say Germany. Have money and a college education. Would be able to support yourself and your family from day one. Your looking at maybe getting a legal work VISA and then up to 5-6 years of jumping through hoops to get here. The cost side of doing this legally can easily be $15-20K.

Now we have people that just happen to live across a river not and ocean. So they can walk in a dry summer. They come here without any education and the cloths on their backs Refuse to learn our language pay little to zero taxes. Then send all the money they can back to Mexico so they never get going very good here.

Which of these are better for the country???? The exact opposite person than the one half the country want to "HELP" come here FREE OF ANY COST!!!!!!!

Talk to anyone that have immigrated here legally in the last 20 years. It is a long costly road to get here. I say increase the number of legal immigrants we allow in each year BUT take those with the skills to take gave of themselves from day one.

On the Global Warming issue. If you can read and study things you know the climate cycles. It has for millions of years. We were in a up swing of temperatures. Now we seem to be getting cooler or staying the same. Parts of Greenland where farmed that now can not be because they are too cold. This was 600 years ago that it was warmer. Northern Europe was warmer then too. Modern causes are all about control and money. The rich get blamed for trying to do this while the Liberals have it down to an art form. Both parties and many governments in the world are trying to use this issue to control the rest or the world. PLUS bleed money from anyone they can in the process.

(quoted from post at 00:12:20 07/07/18) Because they come here and don?t pay income taxes then
send all the money back to Mexico for there families now do
you get it ? Your grandpa camt to work and build up the
country not sponge off it .

Click to expand...

I don't know if every immigrant evades taxes or not. Most of them want to do as my ancestors did. Make a better life for their families. It's a matter of survival to them.

I believe the "global warming" is a scam created by China to hurt US manufacturing. In this way I think global warming is man made. The actual warming is a natural phenomenon. This planet has gone though many warm and cold cycles long before there were people. Even the scientists that are pushing the current global warming admit it started many thousands of years ago.

I have lived through. Acid rain,freon,comet hitting the earth,radon gas,aides scare,R12,Swine flu,Global cooling,Global warming,Ice
caps melting,Ice caps freezing,pork is good beef is bad,beef is good pork is bad and many others. Now I am told I must ask my grandson
if it is ok to change his diaper.Not much left to be afraid of.

Were they members of MS 13?

Good one, I love it.

Did your ancestors get welfare, food stamps, free medical, dental, vision, and every handout available? Probably not, and I imagine they came here to work and build a better life for themselves. That is not the case with the immigrants now. They have all heard of all the freebies that the US government hands out, and they are here to get theirs. Sad, but true.

That's a reasonable question and deserves a reasonable answer.

The reality is that the majority of carbon is generated by a fairly small number of countries. China, the US and India together generate about as much carbon as the rest of the world combined. Throw in Russia, Japan and Germany and that accounts for 60 percent of the world's carbon production. If we are going to cut back on carbon, it makes sense to do it where it's going to have the greatest effect.

The other problem is incentive. Yes, many developing countries have very dirty industries. And some developing countries are adversely affected by climate change worse than the developed countries due to geography. But there's little incentive for developing nations to clean up their acts when they don't see any movement on the part of the biggest and richest polluters. The only way they'll reduce their own carbon emissions is if they see everybody else is doing it, AND they get some help from those countries that can afford to do so.

Global warming is caused by two things. The first thing that started it was shooting all kind of rockets and space junk through the ozone layer, leaving gaping holes that get bigger with time. Just think of how many holes have been created since the space program has started. The second thing is air conditioning. The world has decided to cool itself down to where it wants to be instead of what the climate thinks is appropriate. Conditioning the air creates a heat transfer, plus the actual heat produced by the machine that makes it happen. This heats up the air outside more than the cooling inside produces on the same scale.
I know this is true, because I heard it in a beer joint in South Texas. And if you decide to go, remember what Dave Dudley said, "better make dern sure you wear your knife proof ear muffs". That's a fact.

I?ve got friends that immigrated from Canada pretty cheaply. One real cheap, he married a girl who grew up with my wife. He actually pays into the Canadian SS system, says it pays off better, and he plans to move back when he retires. He already owns a house here. He programs robots. A couple of engineers I know moved here from Canada, with no real cost, I suspect because they had a job waiting for them. I also know some Germans that moved here, but again, they had a job waiting for them. I was interested that some Germans never sold homes in Germany that they had inherited. They said if they sold, getting back into a comparable home would be difficult. Real estate, especially rural parcels, stays in family there.

(quoted from post at 19:18:14 07/06/18) I have lived through. Acid rain,freon,comet hitting the earth,radon gas,aides scare,R12,Swine flu,Global cooling,Global warming,Ice
caps melting,Ice caps freezing,pork is good beef is bad,beef is good pork is bad and many others.

Click to expand...

"I have lived through. Acid rain,freon,comet hitting the earth,radon gas,aides scare,R12,Swine flu,Global cooling,Global warming,Ice caps melting,Ice caps freezing,pork is good beef is bad,beef is good pork is bad and many others."


Gosh, Billy, you forgot one...

Some thought "Y2K" was gonna kill us all!

Correction: Red Sovine

Yes, yes.

People hire them they are an equal criminal, no?

Some politicians support the way things are now, they are the equal criminals as well?

On the other hand we need the labor in this country and our labor force refuses to do those sorts of jobs.....

We need a better system, from the start, to allow the work and the workers to meet and legally get the jobs done. If you figure out a way to get citizens to do hard manual labor in the political climate we are in, we'll bless you I'll nominate you for sainthood!

But at least we could move foreward with a more honest system, and get the work done buy people who will do the work.

What we have now is criminal, perhaps I see a lot more criminals than you do, I donno.

You fellas aren't quite seeing my point, I guess, and I won't beat my head against the wall on it any more. Your replies seem a little heavy on the hate, and really not trying to figure out a positive solution that accounts for making things better.

Might as well just stay the way it is I guess you all believe.

Paul

Bob, that y2k junk was probably the most closest to getting us.....

Fortunately it got to be such a public scare that most folks that needed to do something about it actually did something about it.......

Paul

I absolutely believe that the people who hire them are criminals themselves, I have long advocated hard time for the highest ranking executive in any corporation which hires illegals. If the head of one of the large meat packers or chicken processors was looking at 10 years in the cross bar hotel for hiring illegals do you think it might stop? Accusing me of "hate" for voicing my side of the debate is just plain illogical, unless you consider your point of view to be so morally superior that no other opinion could possibly be considered. Put vocational education trades back in high schools and faze out welfare over several years and there will be plenty of workers, a person's belly rubbing against their backbone tends to motivate most towards finding a job.

So I assume you voluntarily contributed more money when you filed your 1040 this year to make sure there was plenty to pay for all of those developing countries carbon reduction efforts. Every duly elected scammer in sub-saharan Africa has their hand out, straight from US tax payers pockets to their Dubai bank accounts. The reason that all of these tired progressive mantras sound ridiculous and hypocritical is because they are.

It actually happened here. Caterpiller bought the Electromotive locomotive plant in London Ontario.When the collective agreement came up for renegotiation the company told the union that wages would be cut in half or the work goes to Indiana. The offer amounted to welders and machinists getting 15 bucks Canadian per hour. that plant is a warehouse now.

> So I assume you voluntarily contributed more money when you filed your 1040 this year to make sure there was plenty to pay for all of those developing countries carbon reduction efforts.

No, but I did chip in for the Scott Pruitt Mattress Fund. Third-world kleptocracies have nothing up on the current administration's collection of grifters and petty criminals.

Interesting ...... so I guess when and if that happens, things just pack up and everyone is worse off than they were to start with. Difficult situation for sure.

Bob That was another joke. I was at a hospital in Temple Texas that night. Because they were convinced of the failures. We tried to
tell them. Your generators are not computer controlled. They don't care what year it is. In fact nothing will happen. We still had to
show up. So they fed us pizza and drinks. While we sat there and nothing happened.

We had so many service calls because of Y2K. We got a month behind. All the generator companies in Dallas did. People panicked over
nothing. There was even a car dealer running adds about. Be sure and get you'r new car before the switch. Because the old one will not
work.

(quoted from post at 17:08:09 07/06/18)

(quoted from post at 00:56:25 07/07/18) LF ..... wages rolled back? So your boss calls you into his office and says, "Hey Mr. Fure, your $25 per hour job on that assembly line is
gonna stay so don't worry about your job, but we're now gonna pay you only $7 per hour". That's almost laughable and it ain't gonna happen.
I'm with you though on your water and air comment though.

Click to expand...

Wasn't one of the reasons manufacturing jobs left this country was because of lower labor cost? No one wants to work cheap, that's the foreign countries privilege.

Click to expand...

Actually a heck of a lot of those factories were off shore. They didn't get moved. After WWII there was one and one only industrialized nation that could manufacture what the world needed. The US. The reason for that I all of industrial Europe had been bombed, A good deal of Russia too. Of course Germany and Japan. Most of these countries did not get their manufacturing fully back on line until the mid 70's. And if you note that's when jobs started to go away. Now a store had the option. They could buy here in the US or buy from foreign manufacturers and offer item for a good deal less money. So it was foreign interests that started to kill jobs off. After this happened is when US manufacturers had to move operations off shore to compete and stay in business.

Rick

(quoted from post at 20:02:35 07/06/18) That's a reasonable question and deserves a reasonable answer.

The reality is that the majority of carbon is generated by a fairly small number of countries. China, the US and India together generate about as much carbon as the rest of the world combined. Throw in Russia, Japan and Germany and that accounts for 60 percent of the world's carbon production. If we are going to cut back on carbon, it makes sense to do it where it's going to have the greatest effect.

The other problem is incentive. Yes, many developing countries have very dirty industries. And some developing countries are adversely affected by climate change worse than the developed countries due to geography. But there's little incentive for developing nations to clean up their acts when they don't see any movement on the part of the biggest and richest polluters. The only way they'll reduce their own carbon emissions is if they see everybody else is doing it, AND they get some help from those countries that can afford to do so.

Click to expand...

Mark, BS. Most of the US carbon emissions come from cars, not manufacturing. So reducing manufacturing here to reduce carbon emissions means you are going to deliberately make people here in the US so poor they cannot afford to drive? And just who comes up with this data? The UN? And we are supposed to trust the UN here? Sorry, I don't buy it.

Rick

(quoted from post at 04:41:29 07/07/18) > So I assume you voluntarily contributed more money when you filed your 1040 this year to make sure there was plenty to pay for all of those developing countries carbon reduction efforts.

No, but I did chip in for the Scott Pruitt Mattress Fund. Third-world kleptocracies have nothing up on the current administration's collection of grifters and petty criminals.

Click to expand...

LOL what about the last administrations collections of criminals including the one who ran for office?

Rick

> Most of the US carbon emissions come from cars, not manufacturing. So reducing manufacturing here to reduce carbon emissions means you are going to deliberately make people here in the US so poor they cannot afford to drive?

It doesn't matter what the source of carbon is; if the amount of carbon emitted by a third-world country is negligible, eliminating dirty manufacturing from that country will have a negligible effect on world carbon production. And I never advocated reducing US manufacturing; as you well know that's been happening for decades due to economic reasons.

As it turns out, power generation and transportation both contribute about the same amount of carbon in the US. Most of the low-hanging fruit has already been taken in the automotive sector, but a lot of reduction available from power production if coal-fired generating plants are shut down. And those figures come <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions">direct from the US EPA</a>, whose recently departed chief and his acting successor are both well-known pawns of the energy industry.

(quoted from post at 12:08:53 07/08/18) &gt; Most of the US carbon emissions come from cars, not manufacturing. So reducing manufacturing here to reduce carbon emissions means you are going to deliberately make people here in the US so poor they cannot afford to drive?

It doesn't matter what the source of carbon is; if the amount of carbon emitted by a third-world country is negligible, eliminating dirty manufacturing from that country will have a negligible effect on world carbon production. And I never advocated reducing US manufacturing; as you well know that's been happening for decades due to economic reasons.

As it turns out, power generation and transportation both contribute about the same amount of carbon in the US. Most of the low-hanging fruit has already been taken in the automotive sector, but a lot of reduction available from power production if coal-fired generating plants are shut down. And those figures come &lt;a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions"&gt;direct from the US EPA&lt;/a&gt;, whose recently departed chief and his acting successor are both well-known pawns of the energy industry.

Click to expand...

There is one thing we should all keep in mind. This planet has been here bilions of years before human existence. It has gone through many changes during that time. Many creatures large and small have come and gone. In the great scheme of things human beings are only a tiny plip on the earths time scale. It amazes me that we think we are making such a big impact on the this planet. This planet will still be going through many changes long after the human race is gone.

(quoted from post at 17:18:14 07/06/18) I have lived through. Acid rain,freon,comet hitting the earth,radon gas,aides scare,R12,Swine flu,Global cooling,Global warming,Ice
caps melting,Ice caps freezing,pork is good beef is bad,beef is good pork is bad and many others. Now I am told I must ask my grandson
if it is ok to change his diaper.Not much left to be afraid of.

Click to expand...

I'm with Billy Shafer on this one. The MSM has always had the next crisis to kill us all ready to go in print. Al Goracle had a faulty facts movie made to promote his claim all so he could be the first carbon billionaire.
It's all about the money.

Carbon is the 4th most abundant element in the universe after helium, hydrogen, and oxygen. NASA knew in 1994 that Mars ice caps were melting. Martians did not pay their global warming taxes or what? Climate models fail to take into account that star that's 8 light minutes away from us; it has its own cycles of maximum and minimum.
Those that pay for the studies get what they want the study to say and I distrust them mightily.

Corporations would have been able to buy and sell carbon permits which did nothing to reduce carbon but only replaced where it would have been produced. There was even talk of applying it to electrical nuclear production. Nuke plants do not produce carbon at all. Again, follow the money.

Temperature monitors were installed on the outside of chimneys, at commercial AC exit ducts, the middle of parking lots. Its ridiculous how the means to gather data were abused.

Climate change has become a religion of sorts. It is comical how none of these brilliant scammers have come up with an "ideal temperature" for the earth as yet.
I call its adherents watermelons. Geen on the outside, red on the inside.

(quoted from post at 04:08:53 07/08/18) &gt; Most of the US carbon emissions come from cars, not manufacturing. So reducing manufacturing here to reduce carbon emissions means you are going to deliberately make people here in the US so poor they cannot afford to drive?

It doesn't matter what the source of carbon is; if the amount of carbon emitted by a third-world country is negligible, eliminating dirty manufacturing from that country will have a negligible effect on world carbon production. And I never advocated reducing US manufacturing; as you well know that's been happening for decades due to economic reasons.

As it turns out, power generation and transportation both contribute about the same amount of carbon in the US. Most of the low-hanging fruit has already been taken in the automotive sector, but a lot of reduction available from power production if coal-fired generating plants are shut down. And those figures come &lt;a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions"&gt;direct from the US EPA&lt;/a&gt;, whose recently departed chief and his acting successor are both well-known pawns of the energy industry.

Click to expand...

Mark, as much so called data has been tampered with by various groups to further the "climate change" agenda give me a source that can be trusted to produce good data. The EPA and UN are mostly likely the 2 sources I would least trust to be honest and than have a track record to back that up.

It's kinda like CA back in the 90's. The state claimed that cars were the biggest polluters in the state when in fact it was small manufacturing concern that the government was trying to not drive out of the state. So the government blamed cars.

Well now today you can present data that can't be documented nor can the methods of collection be confirmed or duplicated. That's necessary to conduct peer reviews to determine IF the study is correct. Duplication is mandatory to be able to prove that data. Now ask yourself why neither the UN nor the EPA is willing to tell anyone how that data was collected? I can give you a good guess as to why and it has absolutely nothing to do do with "climate change" or pollution and everything to do with redistributing the world's wealth. That's why most of the studies are tainted with fudged data. And yet some people try to push it as legit data and studies to either further their agenda or to support their party.

Rick

(quoted from post at 13:52:21 07/06/18) Yes, Native Americans are a perfect example of their failure to control immigration!

Click to expand...

yea...i wonder when canadians will their country back.....

> Mark, as much so called data has been tampered with by various groups to further the "climate change" agenda give me a source that can be trusted to produce good data.

Rick, there is plenty of data from plenty of different sources, and it's pretty much all saying the same thing: the earth's temperature is rising as is its atmospheric CO2 level. Some researchers are even going back and combing through British Navy ships logs of the eighteenth and nineteenth century. And there's plenty of supporting evidence that isn't easily faked; the most obvious example being the glacial retreat, photos of which you can <a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/4/graphic-dramatic-glacier-melt/">see for yourself on the NASA web site</a>. Sorry, but I don't subscribe to the theory that NASA scientists are in the habit of faking photographs.

Most of the climate change skeptics have given up on discrediting the evidence of global warming; these days they find it more credible to come up with off-the-wall theories as to why it's happening.

But your original post seemed to acknowledge climate change is a given. Or at least didn't dispute it. Why are you backtracking now? The point is not whether or not we need to reduce carbon emissions, but rather what's the best way to go about it.

Mark, Yes the climate is changing, IT'S ALWAYS CHANGING. IT ALWAYS HAS! There is little to no evidence that man has much to do with it. Right where I sit at one time had a tropical climate and at another it had somewhere between 5 and 7 miles of ice on it. [i:cad2c4d7c7]All before man had any effect at all![/i:cad2c4d7c7] The earth has been without polar icecaps more of it's existence that it's had them according to geologist. No one is really arguing whether the climate is changing. It's about why it's changing.

OK think about this. In the US, UK and most of Europe factories have to meet some type of environmental standards. Most of the rest of the word little to none. So shutting down production and killing job here and in Europe keep more factories that have to meet tuff standards regulated rather than allowing countries with no controls to pollute even more. That is not going to slow emission that may, just may have a chance of effecting the climate one little bit. In fact it's going to cause more harmful pollutants to be released into the environment. And these countries that have little to no regulation on emissions will have little to no incentive to reduce them. Plus most of those are so corrupt that even if they had EPA type rules no one would follow them! So both the Kato and G7 agreements are fraudulent. Somewhere in there is a hidden agenda.

You nor anyone else has ever explained how R12 Freon, that take 50 years to break down and ascend to the ozone layer, got up there a mere 30 years or less than it was in common use. Remember it has to break down to component that are lighter than air to get up there. Nor have you explained how were went from having a man made ice age because of exhaust gases (yea that's what we were told in school in the late 60's) to having a heat wave cause by that very thing.

As far as studies? They have to be peer reviewed by folks who are neutral or are not trying to prove the same thing. Almost no data exist concerning so called climate change emissions that are not subject to a great deal of question. And something is really wrong when government agencies and state owned colleges are refusing to share data so that it can be reviewed.

Sorry, ain't many koolaid drinker here on YT.

Rick

Mark, I'm all in favor of being a good steward and reducing mans impact where we can. But blind obedience to any agenda is not a good idea. There are more than enough scandals, data massaging, out right lies and a huge amount of speculation of the damage climate change was supposed to have caused by now that didn't come true to make me at least skeptical. When I add in the amount of power and money in play...it's obvious that SOME people might use climate change as a scheme to make a whole heck of a lot of money. So, I'm at least skeptical of some of the more radical claims.

Beyond that, if climate change is in fact happening and it's mostly due to man, then what can we do to stop it over the next year, or 10 years? Nothing. That's what the experts end up admitting when anyone finally pins them down. Some advocate for basically returning to the 19th century, other actually call for reducing the earths population by 80%. I assume they don't include themselves in the great kill off. So what we end up with is a lot of people arguing over something no one has any real intention of changing, or ability to change. The very few idealists that would willingly return to an 1830 lifestyle have my admiration, but they are very few in number. In the end no one is going to do anything that we aren't more or less on track to do now.

(quoted from post at 15:28:09 07/08/18)
Mark, I'm all in favor of being a good steward and reducing mans impact where we can. But blind obedience to any agenda is not a good idea. There are more than enough scandals, data massaging, out right lies and a huge amount of speculation of the damage climate change was supposed to have caused by now that didn't come true to make me at least skeptical. When I add in the amount of power and money in play...it's obvious that SOME people might use climate change as a scheme to make a whole heck of a lot of money. So, I'm at least skeptical of some of the more radical claims.

Beyond that, if climate change is in fact happening and it's mostly due to man, then what can we do to stop it over the next year, or 10 years? Nothing. That's what the experts end up admitting when anyone finally pins them down. Some advocate for basically returning to the 19th century, other actually call for reducing the earths population by 80%. I assume they don't include themselves in the great kill off. So what we end up with is a lot of people arguing over something no one has any real intention of changing, or ability to change. The very few idealists that would willingly return to an 1830 lifestyle have my admiration, but they are very few in number. In the end no one is going to do anything that we aren't more or less on track to do now.

Click to expand...

Bert, right on the money!

But then if you look, going back to the 1800, s they had a huge problem with horse manure in metropolitan areas. Then you had things like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London caused by not only power and factories burning coal but massively used for home heating because it was available and cheap. Heck way back sense Roman times they flushed human waste from cities into the rivers. A lot of this type of thing is still going on in 3rd world countries (what some like to call developing nations). Look at some of the stuff going on in India and China for an example. If you do things to increase manufacturing in countries like those all they are going to do is pollute more.

But yea, there has been so much stuff that's questionable that it needs to be questioned! There is no doubt that a lot of the data is flawed because of how it was collected and or tampered with.

Rick

(quoted from post at 19:31:27 07/08/18)Heck way back sense Roman times they flushed human waste from cities into the rivers. A lot of this type of thing is still going on in 3rd world countries (what some like to call developing nations).

Click to expand...

That's putting it mildly. Here's a show specifically about the history of the toilet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZHm3vkavgM

Then add on top of that how, up north in Canada, many cities up there will sometimes release hundreds of millions of gallons of raw sewage into the rivers. Sure makes one wanna think twice about that upcoming fishing trip, or swimming in the local mud hole. :shock:

There was always lots of buzz about those times on a prospecting forum I used to be on. People would complain about some lone guy with a small sluice box and a shovel making too much mess in the water, yet so many folks didn't seem to care about the [i:e76d2288ee]millions [/i:e76d2288ee]of gallons of sewage that'd just get "released"; no special pre-treatments or nothing, from what I understand.

As for that video link, that show was on BBC some years back. It's really a crappy show -- pun intended. *lol* Seriously though, it's interesting, informative AND entertaining. Just be thankful they don't have Smell-O-Vision yet! *hehe*

> When I add in the amount of power and money in play...it's obvious that SOME people might use climate change as a scheme to make a whole heck of a lot of money.

Who has the most money at stake? The various and sundry government and non-governmental organizations who are doing serious research? Or the companies and individuals who have billions of dollars riding on the future of petroleum and coal? The argument that scientists are making stuff up to ensure they keep their GS-11 jobs just doesn't hold water; most of those guys could make a lot more money in private industry but choose to do what they're doing because they think it's important.

> Beyond that, if climate change is in fact happening and it's mostly due to man, then what can we do to stop it over the next year, or 10 years? Nothing.

Fixing climate change in the next ten years is not the goal. The goal is to try to ensure the planet remains habitable for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

> Sorry, ain't many koolaid drinker here on YT.

It appears to me there are quite a few.

(quoted from post at 03:01:54 07/09/18) &gt; When I add in the amount of power and money in play...it's obvious that SOME people might use climate change as a scheme to make a whole heck of a lot of money.

Who has the most money at stake? The various and sundry government and non-governmental organizations who are doing serious research? Or the companies and individuals who have billions of dollars riding on the future of petroleum and coal? The argument that scientists are making stuff up to ensure they keep their GS-11 jobs just doesn't hold water; most of those guys could make a lot more money in private industry but choose to do what they're doing because they think it's important.

&gt; Beyond that, if climate change is in fact happening and it's mostly due to man, then what can we do to stop it over the next year, or 10 years? Nothing.

Fixing climate change in the next ten years is not the goal. The goal is to try to ensure the planet remains habitable for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Click to expand...

Mark, the thing is that lots of folks, on a crusade to save the world, will stay in that GS-11 job so they "can make a difference". And a lot of them are not even government employees but contractors.

A scientist isn't just a scientist. They specialize in a field. An oil company isn't really interested in the study of the climate. So they are not getting hired there. Nor does and auto manufacturer want them. In fact about the only 2 places they can find a job is at a college or with the government. What does an oil company want? Geologist and chemist. So the claim that they could make more money elsewhere is just another falsehood to go along with all the other falsehoods these people put forward. I mean really? Look at the business world. The only industry that has any need of a climatologist are ones that are trying to sell things like solar panels and wind generators. Follow the money! And because there are tons of climatologist out there today they kinda flooded the market. Now sour grapes comes into effect. Listen to the group that claims women earn less than men. And you can prove that isn't true at all. In a given career field women make as much if not more than men. Where the division comes in is career fields. A person with degree in sociology will most likely start out at less than 50K a year. Over 90% of people graduating with such a degree today are women. Almost any type of engineering degree pays much better and something 89% of graduates are male. Now if you take all working women and add all of their income then average it, do the same for men, without looking at career choices and yes, men on average make more than women. But that has nothing to do with treating women unfairly, it has to do with the career they picked.

Then add in that because of this many are disgruntled with people in general and big business. They see people they went to college with who followed up in other scientific fields making much more money. So the way to make more money is to make headlines with their science! Even if they have to ell lies to do so. They are not looking for that 5 minutes of fame. They are just like the rest of the world and motivated by money! Now combine them with someone else with an agenda......like a politician with a one world agenda. Now you have 2 liars one who wants money and the other power.

Keep in mind that the world has been without icecaps and that Greenland was once habitual what on earth makes you think that climate change will make the earth uninhabitable for us, our children or grandchildren? Cause some doomsdayer says so? In the 60's they said we were heading into an mini ice age cause by man. In the 80's we were going to burn up from holes in the ozone layer caused by freon. Only to find out a few years later that there has always been holes in the ozone layer and they change size regularly. Plus the ozone eating freon had not even ascended that high yet. Then a few years back it was global warming and now climate change when global warming was debunked? And you still believe them? And they are still trying to sell "wolf" tickets.

Now as far as colleges are concerned. They too are not motivated by truth. They are motivated by money. That means drawing attention to departments. Cause what really counts are backsides in seats in the classroom. They sell those seats! It's all about the money. Also if Greenpeace and other environmental groups fund studies while restricting access to data, potentially flawed data the colleges do that. Remember it's about the money.

I maintain that right now one of the biggest ways to reduce world pollution is to shut down manufacturing in countries with no environmental regulations. You can't force them to regulate emissions. They only way to do that would be to invade them and occupy them with the intent of keeping that country as a possession! That's because there really is no was to reduce or emissions any further without completely destroying out economy. Please show me just how first the Kato accord then the G7 treaties were going to actually reduce emissions WORLD WIDE!

Rick

(quoted from post at 07:01:54 07/09/18) &gt; When I add in the amount of power and money in play...it's obvious that SOME people might use climate change as a scheme to make a whole heck of a lot of money.

Who has the most money at stake? The various and sundry government and non-governmental organizations who are doing serious research? Or the companies and individuals who have billions of dollars riding on the future of petroleum and coal? The argument that scientists are making stuff up to ensure they keep their GS-11 jobs just doesn't hold water; most of those guys could make a lot more money in private industry but choose to do what they're doing because they think it's important.

&gt; Beyond that, if climate change is in fact happening and it's mostly due to man, then what can we do to stop it over the next year, or 10 years? Nothing.

Fixing climate change in the next ten years is not the goal. The goal is to try to ensure the planet remains habitable for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Click to expand...

Who has the most money at stake? Gee, I dunno Mark. Maybe it's all those Solyndras that took their billions, did nothing and walked away. Maybe it's the various multi-national corps like GE that want laws passed that mandate people buy their new technology that may or may not work all that great, but that those companies get billions for to develop. As for these altruistic GS-11's working at EPA, NOAA, NASA, etc., where is your proof that they're all there because of their core belief in climate change and not because it's a good secure position with excellent benefits and is often nearly the sole opportunity for employment in their field? News flash- scientists like to eat and be able to pay their bills too. The fact is that while, yeah, Big Oil has a lot of skin in the game, Big Oil is small potatoes compared to companies like Apple that have a system where what you buy today will be outmoded in 6 months- and there's little regulation involved in that industry. So what do you think is going to be more profitable down the line, coal or a new, mandated green energy system that is required by law, backed by gov't funding, will require "NEW! IMPROVED!" updates and purchases regularly and has little regulatory costs involved? I know where I'd put my money if I was an investor.

You have a plan to "fix" climate change? Holy smokes! We have a Nobel Candidate here! Please, what have you developed that will "fix" an entire planets ecosystem? This is amazing! We can't predict weather accurately 10 days out but we someone here who knows how to "fix" something affecting the entire planet 100 years down the line!

Do tell............

Mark I don't think anyone here wants to destroy the world. Most of us don't like being lied to either. And when NASA, NOAA, The EPA and other government agencies have admitted that they fudged and or manipulated data to prove climate change you cannot blame any of us for refusing to take anything they say at face value. You can only cry wolf so many times before we stand back and watch as the wolf eats you. We are way beyond that point.

Now just an odd question......what are you doing on an old tractor forum? With your thoughts on this shouldn't you be on a tier 4 tractor page or draft horse forum?

Rick