Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND (Post 1128108)

All of that is why things like the Paris Accord (and Koyoto before that) allow developing countries more leeway. You have a more thoughtful approach to that than many on the right.

This will ultimately become an economic issue; unwise coastal development + increasing sea level + storms (and lets assume the same frequency and intensity of storms) will continue to cost us more and more in the coming years. Swiss Re and Munich Re adopted climate change impacts and as their part of their risk assessment

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND (Post 1128108)

All of that is why things like the Paris Accord (and Koyoto before that) allow developing countries more leeway. You have a more thoughtful approach to that than many on the right.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1128114)

I want everyone on the planet to be healthy, comfortable, and to thrive. Despite what you hear said about me on TV every night, that's exactly what I want, and what I pray for.

I think everyone on the right whom I admire, feels exactly the same way (obviously, there are plenty of thoughtless jerks on both sides, I am referring to the people I listen to, like George W Bush, Trey Gowdy, Tom Cotton, Charles Krauthammer, etc). If you think my thoughtfulness is the exception, I think you are being duped by media types who want you to believe that everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders, watches re-runs of 'Hee Haw' all day, and we only get up out of our chairs to scratch ourselves or beat our wives.

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1128099)

Try telling a drunk that he should stop drinking. Good luck...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman (Post 1128116)

Nebe, Stop Drinking!!

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND (Post 1128115)

I am sure they are good people.

So you take a Krauthammer approach? As I recall, he believes that CO2 is a threat but he thinks scientists can't predict what will happen in the future, so...punt on it for now I guess? Then he fell into the same trap of blaming models and the mythical 'pause'...

You are a thoughtful guy Jim, if CO2 IS a greenhouse gas, which has an impact on the climate system, shouldn't the US be leading on ways to reduce emissions to reduce that risk (and reduce our dependence on imported energy?). I say that while driving a car and using oil for hot water. I'm not advocating for all of us to bike to work, although efficiency is a big part of the story moving forward.

There is semi-good news, we have reduced the rate of rise a bit, largely by industry switching to natural gas from coal because it is cleaner and cheaper. The trend is still up for CO2, but at a slower rate. There are at least some workable solutions to start to work on this. Those nice thoughtful folks in the GOP are out-numbered by the Imhoffs of the world I'm afraid.

enough fun. back to work...

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND (Post 1128115)

Those nice thoughtful folks in the GOP are out-numbered by the Imhoffs of the world I'm afraid.

k...

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND (Post 1128117)

Ummm.
Kev, we're friends on Facebook, and given your posts.. Pot, meet kettle :cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:


:faga:

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman (Post 1128116)

Nebe, Stop Drinking!!

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND (Post 1128115)

if CO2 IS a greenhouse gas, which has an impact on the climate system, shouldn't the US be leading on ways to reduce emissions to reduce that risk (and reduce our dependence on imported energy?). I say that while driving a car and using oil for hot water. I'm not advocating for all of us to bike to work, although efficiency is a big part of the story moving forward.

...

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND (Post 1128101)

Yes there are assumptions.
Absolutely, correct.
But if you company made a model for life insurance based on risk factors, and one variable was for smoking, if there were 100 different models with 100 different assumptions about life expectancy and smoking, and all 100 had a slightly different reduction in life expectancy, but all said you were going to die sooner, your company would charge more for insurance for smokers, right? Or because one models aid average life expectancy is reduced 8 years, and one says 6 years and ones says 4 years, you would say, nope, all models are bad.

The models vary assumptions. They vary parameters in future concentrations, and sequestration and volcanoes and increased cloud cover, and future absorption of carbon in the deep ocean etc etc etc.. But the trend of the models is the same. More GHG's more warming. More warming less land based ice and higher sea levels (among other things).


Actually, from the geologic record, we have a very good idea of past conditions. The last time we saw 400ppm of CO2, was 4 million years ago. The cause of that rise was of course not anthropocentric, but one thought is that changes to ocean heat balances (currents) over long time periods produced changes in T and CO2. At that time average temperatures in the arctic were much higher than present (one link below from Julie B-G's team at UMASS).

Do you dispute the basic physics that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

What do you think of the Pope's stance on climate change?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-above-400ppm/

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND (Post 1128115)

Those nice thoughtful folks in the GOP are out-numbered by the Imhoffs of the world I'm afraid.

..

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1127999)

I've noticed a trend. Many of those who deny that there is climate change believe without question that a guy built a huge boat and put a pair of every species of animal on our planet on board.


Makes you wonder....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by scottw (Post 1128135)

now I'm concerned that it may not be safe inside a greenhouse with all of those harmful greenhouse gasses floating around

Originally Posted by scottw (Post 1128100)

name one...

Originally Posted by buckman (Post 1128149)

It's what they now call climate change deniers .
Funny , the kids are all experts on climate change however most couldn't name the three branches of government on a bet . Might have something to do with where the grant money goes.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1128162)

No way humans could have any affect on the Climate or fish stocks or hell even traffic..

Originally Posted by scottw (Post 1128166)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebe View Post
I've noticed a trend. Many of those who deny that there is climate change believe without question that a guy built a huge boat and put a pair of every species of animal on our planet on board.


Makes you wonder....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


hey Eben, if a guy ( the current Pope) is dumb enough to believe in Noah's Ark, the Resurrection and that his Heavenly Father is floating above in the clouds(invisible friends) observing things issues a statement supporting much of the climate alarmist agenda....is/are he(and those that dutifully follow his word) suddenly intelligent and forward thinking?

Originally Posted by Got Stripers (Post 1128463)

Could be the few degrees of warming the planet has experienced, has allowed more moisture to fuel these storms into more powerful hurricanes, looks like we might be getting a up close reminder of what that means next week.

Originally Posted by buckman (Post 1128476)

History says your wrong
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by DZ (Post 1128524)

I'm one of those who believes that there is nothing we can do about climate changing except to take precautions. Despite lots of studies recommending a moratorium on new construction in coastal flood zones no one is implementing them. I have not seen any states or communities in the northeast place a moratorium on building in flood zones yet... to me that would be a first step in the fight against climate change which causes sea level rise. Another aspect is federal beach replenishment - have to put an end to it unless its privately funded.