|
Originally Posted by Mseuro
(Post 4473891)
Sorry but I will never believe what the government and people with an agenda are telling me. I have a brain and I use it, to me this is all about wealth redistribution and nothing else. The same goes for why our prescription drugs cost are so high compared with the rest of the world, it's because we are subsidizing world health.
You travel to speak about climate and energy. No agenda there, lol I'll side with 99% of climate scientists. |
Originally Posted by blown
(Post 4473936)
Scientists get funded regardless of the outcome of their research.
Normal grant language states something like "grant may be cancelled for cause if progress toward objective of grant is not made, or principal is not in compliance." Researchers at corporations are regularly "at will" or short contract. I'm not attempting to foster a conspiracy theory; but to think research occurs in a vacuum free of political and monetary influence, or that there isn't a market for "junk science" is naive at best, perhaps bordering on delusional. |
You can't make a blind man see. It's all been a lie to advance a narrative. I can't do this thread anymore because I will say something I shouldn't. I just have to accept the fact that there are people that don't believe as I do.
|
Originally Posted by Mseuro
(Post 4473994)
You can't make a blind man see. It's all been a lie to advance a narrative. I can't do this thread anymore because I will say something I shouldn't. I just have to accept the fact that there are people that don't believe as I do.
|
Dow and Pfizer provide grants for research in order to develop commercialized products which they the market and exploit. Its a completely different model of research that really has nothing to do with climate research or academic science whatsoever. That is what is patently obvious... IF you have an objective viewpoint that isn't pre-determined by ideology.
Originally Posted by Speedracer29
(Post 4473977)
Patently false. Research grants get pulled/discontinued. Corporations like Dow, Pfizer, etc., discontinue programs all the time.
Normal grant language states something like "grant may be cancelled for cause if progress toward objective of grant is not made, or principal is not in compliance." Researchers at corporations are regularly "at will" or short contract. I'm not attempting to foster a conspiracy theory; but to think research occurs in a vacuum free of political and monetary influence, or that there isn't a market for "junk science" is naive at best, perhaps bordering on delusional. |
It's not about me giving up, it's about me saying not very nice things to people and I don't want to descend to that level. And yes "blown" I don't trust the gubmint.
|
So the world is heating up. I guess the only solution is to create more taxes and regulations. Probably should redistribute some money around the world while we are at it. That will fix it.
|
Originally Posted by blown
(Post 4474019)
Dow and Pfizer provide grants for research in order to develop commercialized products which they the market and exploit. Its a completely different model of research that really has nothing to do with climate research or academic science whatsoever. That is what is patently obvious... IF you have an objective viewpoint that isn't pre-determined by ideology.
How many grants have been pulled by the EPA? ICF? NIH? Nobody knows....( Well, somebody knows, probably from Open Society.) http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ey-henry-payne http://mobile.the-scientist.com/arti...revoked-grants |
Originally Posted by Mseuro
(Post 4473834)
Had to send this.
I recently sat next to a woman on a flight from Houston which began with pleasantries regarding the purposes of our trip. When asked whether mine was for business or pleasure, I said that it combined a bit of both. I explained that I was on my way to do a media interview. That led her to ask what it was that I do, to which I answered that I’m in the habit of writing quite a lot about topics that vary considerably, but frequently address stuff about climate and energy . . . often many politically incorrect aspects. She asked, “You aren’t like that guy in Ohio that doesn’t believe in climate change, are you?” I responded that I don’t personally know anyone who doesn’t think that climate changes, but there may be one in Ohio that I have yet to meet. Seems to me that climate change has been going on for quite a while . . . billions of years in fact. Global temperatures were at least just as warm about 2,000 years ago during the “Roman Warm Period” when popular fashions featured cool-looking sandals and togas. Conditions were much the same again during the “Medieval warm period” about a thousand years later. That was when Eric the Red and his Norse pals, sans-sandals, raised sheep and goats on southwestern Greenland’s coastal grasslands. Around 1350, Red’s Viking descendants pulled up stakes and high-tailed it out of there for friendlier climes with the coming of a “little ice age.” That big chill lasted until shortly after Washington’s troops spent a brutally cold winter at Valley Forge in 1777, and Napoleon’s beat a brutally frigid retreat from Moscow in 1812. Incidentally, the warming that followed began before the Industrial Revolution brought CO2-belching smokestacks and SUVs, and has continued in fits and starts ever since. Still, U.S. temperatures between 1910 through the mid-1940s were warmer than now, and then cooled again for about three decades. By the late 1970s many “climate experts” heralded the arrival of the next real ice age. That alarm vector reversed entirely about a decade later when Sen. Al Gore’s steamy 1988 Senate hearings concluded that the planet is on fire and we are causing it. She: “We must be. How can anyone deny the influence of the record levels of CO2 we are polluting the atmosphere with?” Me: Satellite temperature records which have been available only since 1979 show that other than naturally-occurring 1998 and 2015 El Nino temperature spikes, no statistically significant global warming has occurred for nearly two decades. On the other hand, satellite imagery shows that the plant-fertilizing CO2 “pollution” you referred to has increased global greening by 25 to 50 percent since then . . . lots more veggies for all God’s creatures. She: “Then why are glaciers melting faster than ever, and causing oceans to rise and coastlines to flood?” Me: Yes, the Arctic, which goes through regular 60-70 year-long warming and cooling cycles, has most recently been losing some ice mass, while most of the vastly larger Antarctic continent has been gaining. A National Academy of Sciences report attributes a primary cause of those thunderous West Antarctic Ice Sheet iceberg collapses we often see featured in the media to geothermal heat from seabed volcanoes below. This coastal melting has been operating at time scales of hundreds to thousands of years. There’s also no reason for feverishly overheated concern regarding glacial melting causing a rapid sea level rise. It’s another natural phenomenon that has been occurring over eons. The rate of that increase has stabilized over the past few hundred years at about seven inches per century. She: “Why then are increasingly frequent and severe weather events occurring which scientists predict will become even worse? How can you possibly claim that we aren’t causing all of this to happen?” Me: If we are, might we then also take some credit for good news too? No category 3-5 hurricanes have struck the U.S. coast since October 2005, a record century-long lull since 1900. And according to both NOAA and U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, there has been no increase in the severity or frequency of floods, droughts, thunderstorms or tornadoes in recent decades either. She: “Well what about all of the real climate scientists who say otherwise? Al Gore got the Nobel Peace Prize for telling us differently. Do you think you are smarter?” I admitted to real professional limitations on that last point. Being more a rocket scientist than true climate scientist like him, I falsely assumed he got the award for inventing the Internet, along with an Oscar for his sensationally dramatic science fiction horror movie acting performance. That abruptly ended our chat. My seatmate promptly returned to reading a Rolling Stone magazine Bernie Sanders feature. The rest of that flight was very quiet. I even got some sleep |
I wonder what happened to all of the Climate experts from the 1960's and 70's that KNEW that we were headed into another ice age.
IF it weren't for all of the money being taken from the people that have it and given to those that don't I just might try to believe. MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING is nothing more than a money grab. |
You gentlemen are just far too easy for astroturfed energy interests to fool. Tinkerer, thats not even close to being true. You are reading baloney on Breitbart which is demonstrably false. The reality is that a few scientists hypothesized this while the majority gave it little credence, and like so many other things in our world in the last 50 years since science has progressed by light years.
The funniest yet saddest part is your comment about money grab. Who do you think is making all the money in our present fossil fuel dominated economy, and cares nothing about the damage caused to both the planet and the people on it? Scientists? Jesus H this is ridiculous.
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
(Post 4474258)
I wonder what happened to all of the Climate experts from the 1960's and 70's that KNEW that we were headed into another ice age.
IF it weren't for all of the money being taken from the people that have it and given to those that don't I just might try to believe. MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING is nothing more than a money grab. |
Seriously, learn something. Your myth about the scientific community and global cooling is based on 9 paragraphs written in Newsweek in 1975 by a sensationalist journalist, and had nothing to do with scientific consensus. Why do i suspect that yet another fact wont pierce the armor of willful ignorance?
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ry-came-to-be/ |
Originally Posted by blown
(Post 4474359)
Seriously, learn something. Your myth about the scientific community and global cooling is based on 9 paragraphs written in Newsweek in 1975 by a sensationalist journalist, and had nothing to do with scientific consensus. Why do i suspect that yet another fact wont pierce the armor of willful ignorance?
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ry-came-to-be/ where I live, in the desert was under hundreds of feet of runoff water at one time . Come visit sometime , geologically fascinating.! |
It would appear Big Oil isn't the only one getting rich off this dilemma-
https://judithcurry.com/2015/05/06/i...mate-research/ From the article: The commentary concludes with the words “Competing financial interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests”. Yet its co-authors have received these grants from the EPA: Driscoll $3,654,609; Levy $9,514,391; Burtraw $1,991,346; and Schwartz (Harvard) $31,176,575. The total is not far shy of $50 million. |
Thats not an intelligent argument. Grants are given to conduct research and determine results, not given based on a pre-determined results. Nor are you acknowledging that these few grants are a drop in the bucket of thousands of recent studies worldwide which form a general consensus that 38 billion tons of a substance which is factually known by physics to trap heat in the atmosphere, added each and every year to the system, is starting to have an effect.
Other point, you think 50 million is ANYTHING close to what big oil makes from our continued use of fossil fuels? Your comparing a grain of sand next to a mountain, and you are also ignoring the fact that scientists dont personally benefit from these studies, unlike the billionaires who own and control the petro giants, and the politicians whose re-elections they fund. The amount of willful self deception going on here is frankly ridiculous.
Originally Posted by Speedracer29
(Post 4474372)
It would appear Big Oil isn't the only one getting rich off this dilemma-
https://judithcurry.com/2015/05/06/i...mate-research/ From the article: The commentary concludes with the words “Competing financial interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests”. Yet its co-authors have received these grants from the EPA: Driscoll $3,654,609; Levy $9,514,391; Burtraw $1,991,346; and Schwartz (Harvard) $31,176,575. The total is not far shy of $50 million. |
Originally Posted by Speedracer29
(Post 4474372)
It would appear Big Oil isn't the only one getting rich off this dilemma-
https://judithcurry.com/2015/05/06/i...mate-research/ From the article: The commentary concludes with the words “Competing financial interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests”. Yet its co-authors have received these grants from the EPA: Driscoll $3,654,609; Levy $9,514,391; Burtraw $1,991,346; and Schwartz (Harvard) $31,176,575. The total is not far shy of $50 million. in line with this , a few years ago the salmon nazis who wish to remove all the dams due to declining populations of fish decided they must bludgeon the too many hatchery fish that were returning to spawn thereby harming the natural fish species? ?? science apperantly didn't fit the agenda. |
Your comparing a grain of sand next to a mountain, and you are also ignoring the fact that scientists dont personally benefit from these studies, unlike the billionaires who own and control the petro giants, and the politicians whose re-elections they fund. The amount of willful self deception going on here is frankly ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
Are they not being paid to provde intended results? I don't disagree with you that the planet is warming up, .. but climate changes constantly and we may or may not be responsible. Just as much big money ready to profit from green or greedness. |
Originally Posted by blown
(Post 4474374)
Thats not an intelligent argument. Grants are given to conduct research and determine results, not given based on a pre-determined results. Nor are you acknowledging that these few grants are a drop in the bucket of thousands of recent studies worldwide which form a general consensus that 38 billion tons of a substance which is factually known by physics to trap heat in the atmosphere, added each and every year to the system, is starting to have an effect.
Other point, you think 50 million is ANYTHING close to what big oil makes from our continued use of fossil fuels? Your comparing a grain of sand next to a mountain, and you are also ignoring the fact that scientists dont personally benefit from these studies, unlike the billionaires who own and control the petro giants, and the politicians whose re-elections they fund. The amount of willful self deception going on here is frankly ridiculous. Grants are routinely given based on relevance to the particular mission of an agency when those grants come from the Federal government. Use buzzwords, get tax dollars. Climate change, community policing, counterterrorism, vaccination efficacy, etc. I didn't say researchers were making nearly what Big Oil was making, but I'm certain the 4 scientists listed are well into six-figure salaries, which equates to "rich" standard among the 99%. I'm done here. When DiCaprio and Gore stop using private aircraft and start driving Priuses like Ed Begley Jr., I'll take climate change seriously. Until then, professors and researchers (and actors and politicians) can preach to their peers in academia and the millennials after arriving at the universities in their Range Rovers with their cutesy "stop global warming", "Bernie 2016", and "coexist" bumper stickers. Warmest regards, Speedracer29 |
Is it fall already????
|
Originally Posted by shepnic74
(Post 4474416)
Is it fall already????
|
hey blown,,you know Venus used to have water on it,,till the sun expand just a little more,,and guess what,,sun is still expanding..take you global crap and try and stop the sun.see you on mars soon.about the only and next place to go.
|
If summer ended now this will have been the hottest summer ever on record for metro Detroit. Even if the last part of summer cools off they said we should be in the top 5 hottest summers. Been a great boating season. Been out 28 times and still going strong. Global warming. I love it.
|
BLOWN - I don't know how old you are but I LIVED through that era and REMEMBER hearing it said MANY times on the news back then. SO now you are telling me I didn't hear it after all.
AT least I KNOW THE TRUTH |
Originally Posted by captain caveman
(Post 4473944)
:party-smiley-004:
You travel to speak about climate and energy. No agenda there, lol I'll side with 99% of climate scientists. |
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
(Post 4474753)
BLOWN - I don't know how old you are but I LIVED through that era and REMEMBER hearing it said MANY times on the news back then. SO now you are telling me I didn't hear it after all.
AT least I KNOW THE TRUTH |
Blown - If you are still alive in 40+ years when the scientists of THAT era say that the data was false and made up by the BRIBED scientists of the recent man made global warming craze. Are you going to plug your ears, stick your head in the sand and scream NA NA NA NA - I CAN"T HEAR YOU...
|
IF you really believed in man made global warming you would sell everything fuel powered that you own. live in an earth bermed house and live off the land using only solar power. UNTIL you do this than you don't really believe in what you say. SAME as your IDOL Al BORE
IT IS ALL A MONEY GRAB - same as OBUMMERCARE |
I'm going to burn all the cheap gas I can, continue heating my home with a non-catalyst wood stove, continue having bonfires in the back yard and singlehandedly destroy the Earth. :P
|
To E.P.A, Global Warming, Global Cooling, and Climate Change Morons:
If you are going to fix the climate I have a few suggestions for my area. I need it to be no warmer than 85 and no cooler than 65. I want it to rain twice a week but only on Mondays and Wednesdays at night while I am asleep, Wind may not blow more than 10 MPH, Hurricanes may never make landfall , Lightning may never touch the ground because it looks cooler in the sky, and Tornadoes can only ravage the Democrat parts of town. If you can do all that I will bust out my checkbook, if not then you can KISS MY BUTT |
Originally Posted by Mseuro
(Post 4474786)
God some people are so fooled by what they think they read. I posted an article from a scientist that was not me on the plane.
Originally Posted by Mseuro
(Post 4474908)
To E.P.A, Global Warming, Global Cooling, and Climate Change Morons:
If you are going to fix the climate I have a few suggestions for my area. I need it to be no warmer than 85 and no cooler than 65. I want it to rain twice a week but only on Mondays and Wednesdays at night while I am asleep, Wind may not blow more than 10 MPH, Hurricanes may never make landfall , Lightning may never touch the ground because it looks cooler in the sky, and Tornadoes can only ravage the Democrat parts of town. If you can do all that I will bust out my checkbook, if not then you can KISS MY BUTT |
Originally Posted by glassdave
(Post 4439459)
Mt Washington?
Originally Posted by SB
(Post 4439482)
Yes.
Just 5 days ago it blew over 100mph also. Seems to happen alot on top of our cold and windy Rockpile. 5 + times a month it seems. Woke up this AM to some sleet and snowflakes in the air. Up north got 2-3" snow. So, the Rockpile has blown over 100mph this AM too. If anyone wants to check current conditions up there, click on this: https://www.mountwashington.org/expe...onditions.aspx It's updated every 10 minutes. Below is the forecast put up today. This should make eveyone feel warm. Friday: In the clouds w/ a slight chance of snow showers. Possible snow accumulations of a trace to two inches. High: Starting in the mid 20s then falling through the day to around 10 Wind: W shifting NW at 55-75 mph increasing to 70-90 mph w/ gusts up to 105 mph Wind Chill: Falling to 15 below to 25 below Friday Night: Mostly in the clouds under mostly cloudy skies w/ a slight chance of evening snow showers. Possible snow accumulations of a trace to less than an inch. Low: Around 5 above Wind: NW at 70-90 mph w/ gusts up to 100 mph then decreasing to 50-70 mph Wind Chill: 20 below to 30 below Saturday: Mostly in the clear under partly sunny skies. High: Mid 20s Wind: NW shifting W at 50-70 mph increasing to 60-80 mph w/ gusts up to 100 mph Wind Chill: 15 below to 25 below rising to 5 below to 5 above Saturday Night: Mostly in the clear under increasingly cloudy skies. Low: Lower 20s rising to around 30 by sunrise Wind: W shifting NW at 70-90 mph w/ gusts up to 105 mph possible then decreasing to 60-80 mph Wind Chill: 5 below to 5 above rising to 0 to 10 above |
Global warming is a thing of the past!!! New Prez is going to nuke the Chinese for even talking about that shiat! :eekdrop:
|
Weather Right now, same place I mentioned above last year, hr and change from my house:
CURRENT CONDITIONS
**THE COLDEST COMBINATION OF TEMPERATURES AND WINDS IN OVER A DECADE POSSIBLE ACROSS THE HIGHER SUMMITS OF THE WHITE MOUNTAINS TONIGHT INTO TOMORROW** Friday Night: In the clouds w/ a chance of snow showers early, and a slight chance of precipitating ice crystals. Snow accumulations Trace-1".
Mostly in the clouds under mostly cloudy skies.
In and out of the clouds trending in the clear under mostly clear skies.
|
So I am asking do you think something is effecting the weather patterns -- whether its global warming or chemicals or humans keep taking and pulling from the earth or pollution or whatever. IMO it seems like extreme weather is happening closer together in all possible worse situations. The extreme heat -- the extreme floods - the extreme winter cold crap - snow in Florida all these extremes within 6 months jeez.
For my area its seems the humidity as really worsen in the summer and for sure the billions of bugs |
SATURDAY, JANUARY 6 2018 9:39 AM
CURRENT CONDITIONS
|
Originally Posted by SB
(Post 4603269)
SATURDAY, JANUARY 6 2018 9:39 AM
CURRENT CONDITIONS
|
we all know by whatever name it's called, it's a hoax. every country signs onto it and our country bears the brunt financially,
and it is perpetuated by guilt and lies that we did it. if you google, atlantic multi-decadal oscillation. ya see how in the 60's and 70's we had big snow and awesome sled riding i remember building snow forts and tunnels along the driveway from the shoveled snow. as the years went by the snow lessened and the climate message gets repeated people remember but they don't research the facts, just take wolf blitzers word for it. if you youtube, How the Earth works (as seen from space) - All parts i would link it but we're having that issue, it's a very good show, 49 minutes, best part, it's pbs / nova and it 100 percent contradicts the climate hoax. seen it 4-5 years ago, and cannot believe it hasn't been re-narrated full of lies and hillary propaganda. for kicks i'm watching it again right now ! edit in, the last 2 minutes of the above listed tv show, (i just watched it),the music goes doom and gloom and we get blamed for all the worlds problems. engines power plants and over consumption is the culprit. damn the electricity, v8's and water skiing ! |
Originally Posted by underpsi68
(Post 4603286)
Just curious what the temperature by your house is?
Supposed to be near -18*F tonight with chills -30* Or so,
The extreme weather I've been posting, is a Mtn very close to me....we are there a lot. Here: https://www.mountwashington.org/expe...onditions.aspx Link is for current conditions. Updates every 10 minutes. |
|
-11 north of Detroit this evening
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:38 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.