What the... Snow in June, then in August!

A forum for discussing world news, ideas, concepts and possibly controversial topics including religion and politics. WARNING: may contain strong opinions or strong language. This does not mean anything goes though!
Forum rules
Please read the Forum rules and policies before posting.
User avatar
Seriously Unserious
Master Superior
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:53 am
Location: Wandering around aimlessly in Lynchgate Woods
Contact:

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Seriously Unserious »

I'd say that no greenhouse gas (GHG) should be produced to higher levels then the planet's ability to remove it, regardless of what the GHG is. That includes CO2, CH4 and all others. H2O is a tricky one, as water vapor it is a GHG, but condensed into clouds and it's the opposite, a sun blocking particulate and contributes to global cooling. IN fact, condensed H2O also dissolves the soluble CO2 into carbonic acid which serves to further reduce GHG's in the atmosphere. So H2O plays on both sides of the fence. And frozed into ice and it's the strongest global cooling agent on the planet, reflecting 90% of the sun's energy right back the way it came, meaning only 10% of the sun's energy is absorbed by the planet, meaning in turn, much colder temperatures. Essentially the energy absorbers on the planet rank from best to worst are: 1- liquid water, particularly oceans, 2- pavement and buildings, 3- sand and dark coloured rocks, 4- trees and dense vegitation, 5- brown soils and rocks, 6- light coloured rocks 7- ice and snow.

Basically the darker, less shiney, less even surfaced and deeper energy can penetrate it, the more energy it absorbs and the more heat it releases. Air is a poor absorber of energy however, because it's just not nearly dense enough to absorb much and radiates it out again too fast. water, on the other hand is transparent enough to let the energy penetrate quite deep, yet dense enough to hold that energy for a relatively long time, making it the ideal energy absorber and holder. Basically, the next time the continents all drift away from the equator and towards the poles is the next time we'll have another jungle earth, and the next time the equator is all or almost all land, we'll have another Snowball Earth.

As for fraking, I am against this procedure as it's being done now because companies are cutting corners, using deadly and highly radioactive chemicals and basically turning our dwindling supply of freash water into dealdy poison in which NO LIFE CAN SURVIVE. That's the industrial equivalent of curing the disease by killing the patient. ON the other hand, if industry would get its act and its ethics together and actually develop clean extraction methods and effective containment and purification procedures so that our drinking water is not left poisonous and deadly thereafter. It could be done if the industrial leaders and/or government had the will to insist on it being done the right way. BTW, most current fraking techniques also unlock radioactive elements contained in the shale that's being fraked and these radio active elements then contaminate freshwater, making it radioactive, and most of these elements decay so slowly that it'll be millions of years before water so polluted becomes inhabitable and not deadly poisonous to life. Personally, I'd rather not wait millions of years for water to become safe to use again...
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

water, on the other hand is transparent enough to let the energy penetrate quite deep,
yes, but some climate scientists speak of not just the water in the atmosphere, ut the clouds position in the atmosphere. lower more dense clouds cool the planet, higher tin clouds warm the planet.

i do not like fraking either, but if people need that cheaper energy, i am not going to worry too much about it, i care for the welfare of people, the earth will be around millions of years perhaps a couple billion years from now, but we won't be, so it is not so relevant.

hehehe
I'd rather not wait millions of years for water to become safe to use again...
i didn't know you lived that long SU :) i wouldn't worry about it, we won't make it past 500,000 years and life always bounces back, ALWAYS. there is not a chance in hell we'll be able to kill this planet, not unless we build a death star :) we all know a big rock will restart life on this planet, and the toxins produced from an impact collision with earth dwarfs any kind of man made toxin we can produce. no need to worry SU, it's futile.

SU, did you read the article on how the climate scientists are blaming this lack of heating up the last 15 years on a ANONYMOUS strong westerly wind. you asked of what proof there was about this stall in climate warming, it's in that article, you'll see i told you the truth, have been all along. people are being misled, and it all come down to mind conditioning, they're turning everything into a commercial. i stated previously how they're treating people like little kids, and they are! that's why i am into the psychology aspect, i don't like what they are doing at all, and they have the biggest affect on our children and young adults. this disturbs me greatly. i chose weather\climate because it is most talked about, and they have really targetted this area. GW is generating support from fear, you know, people who don't want to wait a million years to find out :) i'll say once more, the planet doesn't need our help, we need help from ourselves, as some would put it, the greater population in fear, the sheeple. and there is a wolf in the fold ready to pounce on them. fear is a good teacher, but it is often abused on the weak. why not use weather\climate to control the population and resources. i know if i was making the decisions that i'd be thinking that way, so it should not come to any surprise i can see what is going on. history shows how man has done this over and over to his fellows. now they're using science to do it, and as i said before, many scientists just can't wait to say things like....

could, might, may, perhaps, possible to any of their findings and put a fear spin on it. most of science that hits the mainstream is driven by fear. i hope you can see that. so science to me has become corrupt, corrupt for the need for money, and there is no way they'll be able to deny that. scientists don't get paid to say the earth is doing great and that we don't need gov grants to save the world. that covers a lot of scientists. it wouldn't make them famous now would it. MONEY, yeah i said it before, MONEY is the cause. let us be patient a little longer and let's see how the next few years unfolds, how the scientific theories change, and change, geesh, when i read Stephen Hawkings , Brief History of Time, the guy had me believeing there was mini black holes everywhere, now he's saying there is none, yeah, so things change.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Seriously Unserious
Master Superior
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:53 am
Location: Wandering around aimlessly in Lynchgate Woods
Contact:

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Seriously Unserious »

A lot of commentary there, I'll address the parts I feel need further discussion:
Chaos-Shaman wrote:i didn't know you lived that long SU
Well now you know... :P

Seriously though, that IS my point exactly, we can't afford to wait that long for drinkable water if we poison it all, and neither can any other life form, we'll all be dead by then.
Chaos-Shaman wrote:SU, did you read the article
Yes, I read it. It looks like spin-doctoring mixed with fact, but then I've come to expect that from the mainstream media. Guess who owns/sponsors it, the very people who have the most to gain by fear-mongering, or at least think they do.
Chaos-Shaman wrote:GW is generating support from fear
Ah, yes, fear, that is a great way to make people less able, make them afraid. Not sure how Psychology ranks fear but in Dianetics the long range emotions, I've learned, tend to follow a predictable pattern from highest to lowest this would be:
Survival | Serenity - Enthusiasm - Boredom - Antagonism - Anger - Fear - Grief - Apathy | Death
So more survival emotions would be to the left of that set and more death emotions would be to the right, so you can see that fear is an emotion that signals being near to death, as anyone who's ever felt fear or understands the definition of fear would no doubt well understand.

People who are in a state of fear seem easily controlled. Nice theory, but the problem is that people who are in a state of fear also aren't very helpful, but are very highly irrational and prone to do anything, so that control by fear is an illusion. Unfortunately, there is a very influential core of our leaders who just do not see that, or even refuse to see that, even when the evidence of the fearful rising up to destroy fear-dependent leaders fills our history books.
Chaos-Shaman wrote:and there is a wolf in the fold ready to pounce on them.
There are a few of them. I like to call those people suppressive people, and they are the most destructive people around, who love to hide in shadows and get others to do their dirty work. These people are the way that are because of being in a state of the most extreme terror imaginable. I wouldn't want to be one of that lot, I can't even begin to imagine how miserable an existence that must be, being so terrified as to be incapable of feeling even a moment's worth of real happiness or pleasure.
Chaos-Shaman wrote:scientists don't get paid to say the earth is doing great and that we don't need gov grants to save the world.
Actually, that would depend on who's paying the scientists. Environmental organizations and some government agency funded scientists would have a vested interest in telling us "the sky is falling and we're all going to die" type alarmist claims. Scientists in the pay of heavy manufacturing, mining and oil & gas industries have a vested interest to tell us everything's fine and dandy, there is no problems at all and we can just keep on with business as usual and keep on burning fossil fuels, pumping poisons into our fresh water supplies, land and air and that nothing bad will ever happen as a result of it. So basically what we're getting in the GW vs. no GW debate is a debate between vested interests who on one side profit from GW being true, and from the other side profit from it being false. We're not about to get any reliable data out of that mess one way or the other.

One thing is clear though, the amount of toxic substances in our drinking water, farmlands and air is growing, and it is getting inside of us and lodging in our body tissues, making us very sickly. I recently spent over $1000 to get all that crap cleaned out of me, and found out a bunch of it must have been lodged in my brain, that was suppressing my cognitive abilities. I have empirical evidence to support that too, in the form of IQ tests from before the cleanse and after. Before my IQ was 107, after it rose to 129. that's a 22 point difference, just from having toxins in me vs not having them in me. I used to be processing things so slowly that I was tested as having a learning disability and needed time and a half on all tests. Last fall, as I went through that cleanse I started to notice I needed that extra time less and less to the point where I eventually wasn't even using it at all any more. That's how toxic we're making our home and by extension, ourselves.

So take away the vested interests and look at the indisputable facts and it becomes clear that GW or not, we do need to create clean industries, technologies and transportation systems.

We most definitely do not have to give up our technology but we do have to invest in cleaning it up. If you've ever watched the TV show Hoarders, or seen the home of a hoarder, you will know what I mean. If we spend little or no effort on cleaning things up, we end up with a horrible mess, just like those people who hoard things compulsively and make little or no effort to clean their homes up end up in a horrible mess.
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

without quoating too much, i can say that it's not a matter of if we have an impact or need to clean up our backyards. everything you said should make sense to ANYONE, so it should. what this debate is about is the 97% blame on man for GW, THAT IS A LIE. and as time goes on they'll cook up other excuses, mark those words, they will do it. we can't skip over the fact that people are IGNORANT, they don't care. no matter how much common sense you throw at them, tehy'll still throw garbage out their windows, still start up there ATVs and plough through our wilderness, still get on flights to some warm location, still do things that they KNOW they shouldn't. there is no way we can stop that, never.

now the point of that article was only to show we HAVE NOT gone up in temps the last 15 years on a global average. there has been hot spots and cold spots. there are plenty of graphs out there that'll show you that. i've already begun reading that book climatism, full of real smart people and real graphs and considering i have read books on this topic, you must be able to imagine that there is truth to what i am trying to say. there is nothing for me to gain about this. i am trying to help people, not the IPCC, or the UN, or any other dumb ass group. they get NO MONEY, instead of trying to stop the use of oil, how about trying to get those people to listen, stop doing all the things that these panels consider terrible. they're not doing that though, they're going to use the guilt and fear card til they gain complete control of everyones lives,put you in a box you can't get out of, and hell you know i hate that. you'd figure a shaman who is attached to life, spirits and so forth would be on that bandwagon, but i am not. when i see truth i'll stand by it, and i won't be put into such lines of thought that i can't think for myself.

i did my IQ test oh, about 15 years ago, it was believe it or not the same as yours at 129, i was considered a visionary because i believe i did well with the visual parts, and that is no surprise to me :)
after doing a cheap 5-HTP treatment about a hundred dollars over 2 years and played chess solid for two years i actually improved my memory and i recommend it to everyone. i am loaded with toxins. the definition of what toxins are are very vague. too much of anything is toxic, it is not just for poisons. even water is toxic in high levels. and poisons at low levels can save lives too.

if we're toxic to the earth, then so is every other life form. i'm not afraid of any of that, i am afraid of stupid people and what they might do with war, but as you can see i never talk about that, it's not productive.

life is a wave, there is an up side and there always is a downside, that's life. the good, the bad and the ugly :)
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Seriously Unserious
Master Superior
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:53 am
Location: Wandering around aimlessly in Lynchgate Woods
Contact:

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Seriously Unserious »

the bad and the ugly
Oh no! Here comes the Spaghetti Western reverences now... :P
if we're toxic to the earth
I have never said humans as a species, are toxic to the earth, I have said that certain actions we are doing are though, in the context of that those actions which are harmful must be replaced with new actions that accomplish the same thing but without being toxic.

As for toxic, here's a clear definition for you:
tox·ic
adjective \ˈtäk-sik\

: containing poisonous substances
Full Definition of TOXIC
1
: containing or being poisonous material especially when capable of causing death or serious debilitation <toxic waste> <a toxic radioactive gas> <an insecticide highly toxic to birds>
2
: exhibiting symptoms of infection or toxicosis <the patient became toxic two days later>
3
: extremely harsh, malicious, or harmful <toxic sarcasm>
4
: relating to or being an asset that has lost so much value that it cannot be sold on the market
— tox·ic·i·ty noun
taken from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/toxic
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

hehehehe, i actually liked the movie... i am not a western fella, but the movie was done well.

toxic has all different meanings, the books that i have read they explain the difference. EVERYTHING is toxic. it is a matter of dose. some things kill almost everything there is, but then there is the one animal it has no effect on, that actually thrives on it like with sulpheric acid, it kills and is toxic to humans but there are species that live in it. so the use of the word toxic is loose. alcohol is toxic, yet it cleans wounds and in moderate doses helps some, it cured my stomach, pure ethanol killed the bad bateria in my stomach. i no longer think i will die from the GERD disease i had. toxic is a loose term. atropine a scolpolamine are toxic, yet it is used for heart disease.

i don't know how this has anything to do with weather, but i love talking about it :)
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

Image
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

well, just a take on this last fall, winter and spring.

all seasons were below average where I live and most of N A, there has been snow since the end of October, we had only a few days and I mean just a few days of average temps, the entire winter was killer, snow on the ground still, the Arctic is still -30s, nothing much is coming up out of the ground, it has JUST STARTED THAWING. this was a real bad winter for most of N America, except on the Pacific Ocean coast line, where there was warmer temps in the south and just below average into BC, so the only place where winter didn't really hit hard was western EU and west coast U.S. this winter is on record books in snow accumulations, temps, and duration. NOAA's forecast was completely wrong, same with their hurricane forecast for last summer. these guys really don't know what is going on but as usual they blamed it on CO2 making this extreme cold weather, WHAT A PILE OF SHIT, gullible if people believe that. there is snow in the forecast 3 more times in the next 2 weeks, our average temperature should be near 10 to 12c during that time.

now for the part that everyone doesn't see. our weather channel 'the weather network' had purposely fudged the scale they used to graph. it pissed me off as I noticed what they were doing. it was so cold that they removed the average line and put nothing, then they lifted the bar to make it look like it was average, not only that they changed the scales values, alternating between 4 and 9c, THEY CAN'T DO THAT!, that is directly manipulating the minds of those who expect it to operate the same. it makes me angry they can get away with it, I was smart and checked other regions forecast and found they were manipulating them as well . also during the last three weeks especially, the reporters on TV at TWN kept on up scaling the actual temperatures, that really angers me when they do that.

now the part I don't understand, how does the cities average temperature for the last 30 years be colder in Toronto than it is here where I live, away from the concrete yet we share the same grow zones and geography. there were times were it was 9c warmer there, it's was like that before I moved a decade ago. so how can they have a colder reading in the middle of the fucking city, I KNOW THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE! you can see now why I don't believe them idiots, their agenda is to make us believe and hand over our money to support those crooked scientists agenda. so many scientists are coming out of education but there is little jobs so they need to suck money out to fund science.

@SU, I am halfway done that 460 page climatism book, it basically gives all the science and how it's been twisted and WHO is doing it. I suggest you read it if you want to clear things up. it is a dirty business. it comes down to if the gov wants to help the environment, they need to put out commercials that say, DON"T BUY A CAR, if they don't then it can't be that big of an issue. money is more important to them, also the fear to control the gullible sheeple who want the world to live forever and never evolve or change. it is simple not to pollute, that's all we have to do, temperature is besides the point, what matters is being clean, so tell that to all those who think they can drive a car and it is clean because it is a hybrid or battery power, or burns some ethanol, NONE OF THOSE THINGS IS GOING TO HELP, not driving them will. I know if we remove cars from the scene, the world would come to a crawl :) so there is no easy way out of this, but for god sakes they shouldn't ask for money, there should be no carbon tax, and there should be mandatory transportation where cars are not involved, we can do this already but it is about money. if they ask for money to build a transit system that helps prevent this then that's GREAT, but that's not happening. they are building a MEAN United Nations, a body that wants to control the world by using fear in self preservation. I want to live forever too you know ;)

I've got my eye on the world now, via internet, they're not fooling me. i'll continue learning the truth, and that takes time, more than my life worths. what we do know we don't do anything about. just about everything we do creates waste, that's called life. it isn't the oil companies fault that we all demand oil, or the miners fault we need coal. it's our faults for using all the things that it is found in. anyone who challenges that statement would be lying, unless they live in the woods with a loin cloth.

want to save the world, don't look for blame, just look in the mirror and you'll see.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Seriously Unserious
Master Superior
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:53 am
Location: Wandering around aimlessly in Lynchgate Woods
Contact:

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Seriously Unserious »

We all do need to take responsibility for our environment and health, that's for sure. It's easy for one group to blame the oil companies, another to blame government and still another to blame the consumers but when it really comes down to it, it really doesn't matter what excuses people make or who people blame because the bottom line is the results, and what are the results of creating a society of planned waste? Garbage, wasted resources and a toxic environment.

I really couldn't care less who did what, that's in the past. What I care about is who's going to take responsibility for the world we're living in and do something about it. The mess of a toxic environment is being caused by our actions and therefore can be fixed by our actions.

I'm going to link to a thread posted on another forum that has videos and discussions about an idea for a new way of living that has great potential:

The Venus Project

As for me, I've been enjoying some mild, sunny weather these past few days, but overall the weather on the "Wet" Coast, has largely returned to normal, that is wet and rainy, with the occasional sunny break ever now and then. :)
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

right, we all do need to use our heads, but NOBODY gives a shit, if it interferes with their lifestyle, do you really think they're gonna give it up, I've said this before and I will again that it would be like a chain smoker giving up cigarettes, it's not going to happen, even if they know the harm it could cause. all humanity is like that, there is no escape from that truth, that is why I said look into the mirror, what we see in the mirror is he reason why we do what we do. we're a beastly animal, we burn things to create, to stay warm in our northern parts. we house billions of animals for slaughter in inhumane ways to eat, but that's life man, and there is no way we can change that, not a chance. I do not see burning fuels a threat to the earth at all, and you know I told you it will be here long after we're gone, it will come back like it was spring, and if things are bad, we'll be gone for good after a million years, isn't that just great, the earth takes care of itself. I am not sure if you understand my point yet. we're doing what we should be doing, there is no evil in life, it starts, does great, reaches a high point then dies, that's all there is to it, and according to AGW believers, the sooner we kill ourselves off, the better for the earth. so i'll ask again, WHAT ARE WE SO AFRAID OF, DEATH, new life, a fresh start to the earth, or is it mans self preservation. man is so ignorant, thinks it owns the world, couldn't be further from the truth. we will not be the ones that decide on the earths fate, if we think that way how arrogant can we be. we're nothing special to talk about, we've just run rampant with the idea we're in control, NOT A CHANCE!, we're not in control of anything, though we do like to think we are and that we're so fucking smart that we can survive forever provided we hand our money and intelligence over to those quacks who think we're doom and gloom, and man is responsible for 97% of our earths problems, THAT IS AN ALL OUT LIE! gee, I am sorry we're ever born, what a pile of crap. we do what we do, 'burn fossil fuels and destroy things, that's what we do, we're not going to change, not unless every human being is placed in a cage, which is what they're trying to do already.

you have to care about who did what SU, oh yeah, because it is now who is going to do what in the future. it is important you see that the bodies they are creating are still based on money, it's about money, that's it. there is no way out of that, Star Trek and their no money in the future is untrue, impossible. if we take away money we take away the reason to create, do more, and that is never going to happen now is it. ahhh, why do we go to war, MONEY and CONTROL. if we were that smart then why do we waste our time with killing ourselves, if we can't stop that what makes people think we can SAVE THE WORLD, what a fucking joke. they can't even quit from being an addict, what makes us think we can stop who we are, hahahaha, not a chance. you know just watching television I can see what is wrong, from a psychological point of view from observations I'd say we are doomed. the way they treat the human mind is pathetic. we're way more than that, I speak from personal experience. it just seems people like to be trated and told what to do, like a child, seems that way. SU, study how commercials work, do some self examination on to what they want us to do, work it out. you know every three commercials is a soap commercial of some sort. I think we all know how toxic soap is, but we're brainwashed "no pun intended" to think it is great stuff, when I say soap I don't mean natural soap, I mean detergents, and caustic and very dangerous group of chemicals that do more damage than any CO2 will do, which feeds the plants, we need CO2, we are based on CO2. do you see what I am saying. we're being brained washed for the sakes of profit. even if it is bad they still condition people. please watch and study commercials, it tells everything about how weak mankind is becoming. we are all capable of doing much more than the way we are being treated today, great thinkers are disappearing, they're making it so we don't have to think anymore, docile. that is not my idea of mankind.

who thinks for themselves nowadays? not many. who researches information to the cause other than to buy products, few. how many are point to read books after books and grow knowledge to the point they can figure it out for themselves, almost none unless there is money involved.

personally, i'll challenge any scientists who think they know the future, ANY ONE OF THEM, because I can. I believe in chance, luck, and know we do not have control over nature, we'll never have that fantasy Star Trek idea that we're just explorers, we don't need money or their non interference rules, now that's just not mankind, that's more like a fucking robot with no wants, mind you if we had that holodeck that would be a different story :)

if people want to save the world from CO2, why not do what I have been saying all along, don't drive. spend money on transportation systems, bit don't hand your money over to a group of blood sucking fear mongers who paint the picture of man as evil, because in honesty, we made the world evil up. no other animal makes up such stupid stories like the way we do. oh, I could go on forever about the psychology of it all, the fact we burn fuels and flush our toilets is not going to change no matter what we do, that's just common sense. the earth doesn't need to be saved from us, we need to save ourselves from ourselves, I am sure the planet will be happy when we're gone, and anyone who thinks we can control our planets weather system is just not being realistic to the facts we live by. the world doesn't need us to go on does it, it will when we're gone. there is no need to fear death, the planet would be better off right, like that is common sense right. so why do we want to preserve ourselves if we know we're so damn dependent on energy, that we know we flush our toilets and pollute in EVERYTHING
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

yeah, we have 4 days of snow in our forecast in the next two weeks, winter is hanging around here and there. looks like a cold spring too. it's still plenty cold in the Arctic, I can't wait to see the report on how much new ice was added to last years record ice accumulations. the entire fall\winter season had temps -30 and colder, you can bet that added a few feet of ice that may not melt this year, I say may because it is melting from warm waters from active volcanic activities under it, that the black soot is now covered with snow and if the sun doesn't hit it, the ice will stay.

according to some scientists they say that when the oceans warm, we get more snow, the snow reflects back the heat from the sun. it is not the air the warms the water, it's the sun and the earths own geothermal activity that does. you bet ya, the earth has been active over the past decade and of no fault of our own. I am still doing research on all of this, I won't ever stop either. no answer is without questions. answers change with time. so let's wait a decade and see what happens, let's see if the cooling trend over the past 15 years continues. this could last just a year, or it could be 30 or 40 years, that's only one cycle that scientists know is not predictable, THEY KNOW THIS, but try telling that to Gore. that guy is demented beyond hope, twisting our young minds. ok, I have had enough for today :)
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

this one is for you SU, please read it, it is telling the truth, it hits on some of the things I have been talking about the last 4 years.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/global-co ... 00879.html
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

The University of Queensland in Australia is taking legal action to block the release of data used by one of its scientists to come up with the oft-quoted statistic that 97 percent of climate scientists agree that mankind is causing global warming.

Since coming out with this figure last year, climate scientist John Cook of the University of Queensland’s Global Change Institute has been under fire for the methodology he used.

“Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on [anthropogenic global warming] is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research,’’ Cook and his fellow authors wrote in their study which was published in the journal Environmental Research Letters last year.

The university has told climate skeptic blogger Brandon Schollenberger that the data on the study he possesses was illegally obtained and they would take legal action against him if he published it.

“UQ has therefore published all data relating to the paper that is of any scientific value to the wider community,” said Queensland’s acting pro-vice-­chancellor Alastair McEwan.

“UQ withheld only data that could identify research participants who took part in the ­research on condition of anonymity,” McEwan added. “Such conditions are not uncommon in academic ­research, and any breach of confidentiality could deter people from participating in valuable research in the future.”

McEwan said that all the data Cook used to come up with his “97 percent” consensus was published on his blog SkepticalScience.com. The school says it wants to protect the privacy of those surveyed in Cook’s research.

“That’s right. The University of Queensland sent me a threatening letter which threatens me further if I show anyone that letter,” Schollenberger wrote on his blog Thursday. “Confusing, no? It gets stranger. Along with its threats, the University of Queensland included demands.”

“According to it, I’m not just prevented from disclosing any of the ‘intellectual property’ (IP) I’ve gained access to,” Schollenberger added. “I’m prevented from even doing anything which involves using the data. That means I can’t discuss the data. I can’t perform analyses on it. I can’t share anything about it with you.”

“Apparently I badgered Cook too much. I tried too hard to get him to do his duty and try to protect his subjects’ privacy. The University of Queensland needs me to stop. If I don’t, they’ll sue me,” he said.

Cook’s paper has been touted by environmentalists and the Obama administration as evidence that virtually all scientists agree that global warming is a man-made threat.

“Ninety-seven percent of scientists, including, by the way, some who originally disputed the data, have now put that to rest,” President Obama said last year announcing his climate plan. “They’ve acknowledged the planet is warming and human activity is contributing to it.”

But Cook’s 97 percent consensus claim was rebutted in subsequent analyses of his study. A paper by five leading climatologists published in the journal Science and Education last year found that Cook’s study misrepresented the views of most consensus scientists.

The definition Cook used to get his consensus was weak, the climatologists said. Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate studies examined by Cook explicitly stated that mankind caused most of the warming since 1950 — meaning the actual consensus is 0.3 percent.

“It is astonishing that any journal could have published a paper claiming a 97% climate consensus when on the authors’ own analysis the true consensus was well below 1%,” said Dr. David Legates, a geology professor at the University of Delaware and the study’s lead author.

Queensland’s legal fight with Schollenberger comes while UK news outlets are reporting that one of the world’s top scientific journals rejected a study from five climate scientists for political reasons.

The UK Times reported that a reviewer with the journal Environmental Research Letters rejected the study because it was “harmful” to the climate cause because it “opens the door for oversimplified claims of ‘errors’ and worse from the climate skeptics media side.”

“The problem we now have in the climate community is that some scientists are mixing up their scientific role with that of a climate activist,” Lennart Bengtsson, a research fellow at the University of Reading, told the Times.

Bengtsson was one of the study’s authors and recently joined the camp of scientists skeptical of global warming.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/16/where ... z324kN7E00
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

it's May long weekend and we're still seeing snow across Canada, good frost this morning. I am beginning to think this summer is going to be crap. been crap where I live since 2007, I have had my eye on ALL parts of the world, using all the tools the net has available, and I can say this, they're not telling the whole truth.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Saumun
High Lord
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:03 am
Location: The Ether

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Saumun »

I am neither agreeing nor disputing the general argument over the climate issue, as i am not nearly well enough informed on the matter in terms of the science.
What i am sure of though, is that governments will rake in billions (perhaps trillions) in green taxes over the next few years, and we'll probably see no tangible reduction in CO2 levels.
When there is so much money to be made, certain people will go to almost any lengths to get it.

The wider problem is the unstoppable population explosion (i'm sure only a few years ago it was roughly 6.2 billion and now it's 7).
Couple this with certain nations newly found affluence (i'm not knocking this... why shouldn't everyone have what others take for granted), and you get so much consumer demand that you'll never get enough people to care about emissions when it impinges on the aforementioned affluence.
For example... Roughly ten miles from where i live, there is a Land Rover/Jaguar plant. In the last few years they have constantly taken on more and more employees to meet the ever increasing demand. They simply cannot make the cars quickly enough. A huge (probably talking over 75%) amount of them are exported to China.
When a group of people that have lived for so long in abject poverty suddenly get rich (or at least much better off than they were), it is very difficult to go back. The environment will come a poor second to luxury goods (and since the west has generally taken this lifestyle for granted for so long, why shouldn't they).
On the other side of the coin... a great many people are so poor, they would feel they have more important things to worry about. You could argue that nothing is more important than saving the planet, but someone that cannot afford to eat may beg to differ.

The people want the goods and the jobs, the manufacturers want the money, and the governments want the taxes. Anyone that thinks this will ever take second place to the environment are in for a long, long wait.
“Grynix Ernum Quey Ki Skebow Rednim U Os Dey Wefna Enocarn Aquantana” - Anon
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

What i am sure of though, is that governments will rake in billions (perhaps trillions) in green taxes over the next few years, and we'll probably see no tangible reduction in CO2 levels.
When there is so much money to be made, certain people will go to almost any lengths to get it.
even though CO2 amounts have gone up (miniscule in comparison) over the last 15 years or so, the temperatures actually have remained stable, not gone up in accordance to what the scientists doom and gloom forecasts gave out. you are certainly right about the money, it will not matter if we pile in trillions into it because some bastard is going to get it anyway, and they won't give a shit, money trumps environment, so handing out money to help fix the problem is IMO STUPID. it just makes the scientists more corrupt, they want money too, and they have bills like everyone else does, and they can be bought out like anyone else, history is filled with those deals.
The wider problem is the unstoppable population explosion (i'm sure only a few years ago it was roughly 6.2 billion and now it's 7).
the reason we're seeing population explosions is due to longevity, third world countries standard of living is improving, people live longer today, isn't that what we all strive for. other poor countries citizens only lived 30 or 40 years, now it has been bumped up to twice that. birth rates have been falling NOT rising, especially in the rich industrial nations.
For example... Roughly ten miles from where i live, there is a Land Rover/Jaguar plant. In the last few years they have constantly taken on more and more employees to meet the ever increasing demand. They simply cannot make the cars quickly enough. A huge (probably talking over 75%) amount of them are exported to China.
and this is where I get a little pissed off because if people really believed in this and wanted to do something about it, they'd stop buying cars, the government would stop it, there would be no more commercials that mind condition our young to want a car. we don't need money to do this, but we won't get money either, so it's all about money here because we can all make a difference, no need for handing over trillions to crooked government bodies who wish to hold the population in fear. it's amazing how they target people to hate themselves, essentially that is what they are doing to us. man is not a bad, man is good, but talk to any of these AGW believers and they'll pin mankind as the worst thing ever, and we better send them all our money to prevent our sins from destroying the earth, this is a pile of non sense, and I'd stand by mankind to the very end, i'll never blame man for being MAN.
When a group of people that have lived for so long in abject poverty suddenly get rich (or at least much better off than they were), it is very difficult to go back. The environment will come a poor second to luxury goods (and since the west has generally taken this lifestyle for granted for so long, why shouldn't they).
that's right, people over here in N America are quick to blame others, yet they do all the things that they claim is causing the problem. people in N America, many of them are selfish and stupid. I still see people throwing garbage out their car windows, come out of stores and throw their cigarette wrappers and butts with no thought at all. this is where we need to attack the problem. using fear to control and taking our money is not the way to do it.
On the other side of the coin... a great many people are so poor, they would feel they have more important things to worry about. You could argue that nothing is more important than saving the planet, but someone that cannot afford to eat may beg to differ.
this comes down to where we're born. I personally don't think that we should have cities in places like the middle of a desert, or center of a rainforest. I'd chop down a tree for wood if I had to, no doubt about it, or burn coal and I would not feel guilty about that. I, HAVE MADE.... FIRE :) Tom Hanks wouldn't have given it a second thought, he might have burned that whole island down though because he was so excited
The people want the goods and the jobs, the manufacturers want the money, and the governments want the taxes. Anyone that thinks this will ever take second place to the environment are in for a long, long wait.
now that's just the straight truth, the one we have to face. our love for money will always override anything out there, and handing a gov body MORE money is a recipe for disaster.

that's a well balanced view you have Saumun, you have addressed the problem and you didn't use all the skewed data and you didn't use a report, you used common sense. nice job at explaining it. I look forward to hearing more of what you think.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Seriously Unserious
Master Superior
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:53 am
Location: Wandering around aimlessly in Lynchgate Woods
Contact:

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Seriously Unserious »

and this is where I get a little pissed off because if people really believed in this and wanted to do something about it, they'd stop buying cars, the government would stop it, there would be no more commercials that mind condition our young to want a car. we don't need money to do this, but we won't get money either, so it's all about money here because we can all make a difference, no need for handing over trillions to crooked government bodies who wish to hold the population in fear. it's amazing how they target people to hate themselves, essentially that is what they are doing to us. man is not a bad, man is good, but talk to any of these AGW believers and they'll pin mankind as the worst thing ever, and we better send them all our money to prevent our sins from destroying the earth, this is a pile of non sense, and I'd stand by mankind to the very end, i'll never blame man for being MAN.
First of all, many people live in areas where there is no other choice then to drive a car to go anywhere, distances are too far to walk, and there are no buses so it's drive a car or be trapped in isolation with no access to the necessities of survival. It's very hard to tell a person who needs that car to survive to stop driving it, and yet provide no acceptable alternative except to die. How about, if we don't want cars that pollute, let's make cars that do not pollute, or at least that the pollution is negligible compared to what it is in cars now. Small amounts of pollution, the environment can clean up. Trees mostly consume CO2 gas for example.

Also, that last part sounds very familiar. Haven't certain religious organizations start acting like that when they became corrupt? "Pay your tithe or burn in hell!" comes to mind.
using fear to control and taking our money is not the way to do it.
I agree that way too much fear motivation is being used to drive people to throw money at the problem. Money is not the solution to our environmental problems. However, we do live in a money-driven economy so money is needed to be able to produce the solutions to our environmental problems. That will continue to be true as long as we live in a money based economy. The problem with fear is it can produce unpredictable results in people. Scare one person and he'll get violent. Scare another and he'll run away, and someone else still will just go apathetic and stop all activity altogether, while most will tend to submit when scared. Also, fear can easily be overdone as well, leading to a general apathy and if you want action, apathy is one of the worst emotions to produce it. Apathy is an emotion of no action.

The problem with using fear to motivate people to fix the environmental problems we're causing is that most people will become apathetic about the problems, how many times to you see people say things like "there's nothing I can do about it, so why even bother?" under today's "motivational" tactics? Tell a person convincingly enough that driving your car is going to kill us all by poisoned air and there's nothing anyone can do to stop it because everyone else is going to continue to drive their cars and kill us and you have a recipe for that person taking on the attitude of "Since we're all going to choke on smoke tomorrow and die anyways, I may as well get that new hummer and enjoy my car today."

You see, if you really want to motivate people to take constructive action, hope is a much, much stronger motivator, and it motivates people to find ways to make things better.

Personally, whenever I see environmental issues going on, I don't take the attitude of "I (we) can't do anything about that!" but rather the attitude of "how can I (we) do something about it?" You see the difference? One statement closes the mind off to solutions, while the other invites the mind to go to work on developing solutions.

So what differences can I make? I can choose to use non-poluting or low-poluting transportation options, such as walk or ride a bike if the distance is not excessive. I can choose to use the mass transit system if the distances are too far to walk/bike. I can choose to use a carpool if I was going somewhere that buses don't reach, or buy an electric car to get there. Do these choices completely eliminate all pollution? No, of course not, but they do reduce it significantly. Do we need to completely eliminate all pollution from our activities? No. We only need to eliminate enough to get our levels of pollution back below the environment's capability of handling it.
User avatar
Winnfield
Novice
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 8:01 pm

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Winnfield »

Seriously Unserious wrote:
So what differences can I make? I can choose to use non-poluting or low-poluting transportation options, such as walk or ride a bike if the distance is not excessive. I can choose to use the mass transit system if the distances are too far to walk/bike. I can choose to use a carpool if I was going somewhere that buses don't reach, or buy an electric car to get there.

My girlfriend and I think that same way, we do these types of things and we bought a Prius. Also we avoid wasting any food items and try to buy local and organic. We live in the Maryland/DC area and they have a fairly decent metro system which we use even though its cheaper to drive the car. :D
"And you will know my name is the lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."
User avatar
ebeneezergude
Expert
Posts: 345
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:58 pm
Location: I see walls stretching off into the darkness...

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by ebeneezergude »

Seriously Unserious wrote: Do these choices completely eliminate all pollution? No, of course not, but they do reduce it significantly. Do we need to completely eliminate all pollution from our activities? No. We only need to eliminate enough to get our levels of pollution back below the environment's capability of handling it.
Hey SU, I find this topic fascinating. On the one hand we're talking about personal dedications to improving the environment. Use heating less, ride a bike, do not use a car or public transport, take the stairs instead of the lift, etc, etc. All very noble, as and you point out, only worth it if carried out on a mass scale. Ie, if all of the US, for example, adopted this regime, this may be a somewhat positive step in redressing the environmental balance.

The Devil's Advocate in me states, however, that even hypothesising the rosiest of outcomes in the West - let's assume all of Europe and US suddenly go max on the sustainability.. - collectively they're still p***ing in the wind when one considers the outputs from China, Africa, and India, for example.

Further, consider that within your own country (assuming West?), if you all observed bikes and lightswitches and heating and the rest, you're likely - at the very, very best - to be wthin the 50% of the populace who are as like minded as you.

Take your point about aiming to reduce, but is it done significantly? I don't think so. We need the next level of power generation to become a reality before it's too late - fusion power anyone? Free energy is the utopia. Either than or we need to get PVs and wind generation seriously more productive and efficient. Whilst I lament the "other people will do it for me so I don't have to" mentality, as utterly and depressingly sad as it sounds, that's humans survival, in a way. As part of my profession is to make buildings as energy efficient as possible, I always smirk to myself that whatever personal efforts one makes is always dwarfed by the vast magnitude of outputs from countries less sustainability minded as Europe and the US.
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

First of all, many people live in areas where there is no other choice then to drive a car to go anywhere, distances are too far to walk, and there are no buses so it's drive a car or be trapped in isolation with no access to the necessities of survival.
ahh, that answers that. we need oil, we need cars, we need carbon producing. many of the young folk I speak to think we can due with out it. so oil companies are supplying those people who are stuck.... with the means to live, it's no surprise. without oil the entire global economy would fall to pieces. there would be no money to give the UN or IPCC, so it's a catch 22.
How about, if we don't want cars that pollute, let's make cars that do not pollute
I have to laugh at this, it's the production of cars that pollute more than anything, not the oil. as for being stuck, we need to move to where we work, not in some hill top or remote area, want to live there then get use to having nothing. choosing where to live makes sense, living on a coastline is just asking for trouble. I pity those who live on the shores of our oceans. they are asking for trouble even if we didn't burn oil. I know this, I could care less about the sea level rise, I guess we'll learn latter in life that that was a stupid idea. to each their own, but it may come to be in the future that they'll tax those who build on the shores of our oceans, that is for the cost of doing it. wanna live there is going to cost in the future, we can bank on that.
religion has no place when it comes to science, unless they are a scientologist geeks.
I agree that way too much fear motivation is being used to drive people to throw money at the problem. Money is not the solution to our environmental problems. However, we do live in a money-driven economy so money is needed to be able to produce the solutions to our environmental problems. That will continue to be true as long as we live in a money based economy.
yes, but you do know that money corrupts people, even scientists, police, judges, it applies to everyone. I don't care who they say they are, they are still susceptible to want, and that is natural. there is no way we can get rid of that. the bigger the body the more the want. that's science.
The problem with using fear to motivate people to fix the environmental problems
people will take advantage of that.. just look at the power of religion, how it has sucked in anyone who fears death. I hope you understand this. we're dealing with the majority of the people on this planet. if they can listen to some crack pot that is saying if you want to live forever do this, you can see the problem right there. AGW citizens who also use this type of thinking are our problem, some crooked scientists are taking advantage of this very thing. I want to protect these people by having them realize they are being taken advantage of. that's my duty. again money is the reason. we know how much money the churches rake in, we'd be crazy not to see it.
there's nothing I can do about it,
well, the first thing they can do is practice what they preach, and you can tell nobody wants to give up freedom or the chance to make money. this is a simple equation to solve, but near impossible to do. I don't blame people for WANTING more, it's natural, all animals do the same, we're no diff. this is the root of the problem, as I said way back, a person who rants to me how bad oil is should not be doing so while hauling back on a cigarette, I know they're full of shit. they don't care about themselves, that's crying wolf to a wolf.
"how can I (we) do something about it?" You see the difference?
if you are asking me the difference, I already have done my job, more than anyone else I know. not driving or getting on a plane has already done that for me. I garden, plant trees, take care of all the animals in the neighborhood. I can say they all know me :) I have been privileged with time to have taken notice to that. I only wish others would do the same. I talk to the animals, I don't see anyone else doing it accept my father who past away in 2010. I don't ever pollute other than I have to shit and\or take a leak, can't help that, so does every other animal. the best part about this is I never had to give money away to do it, wow, I did that with NO money thrown away to crooked government bodies. I do spend money on buying food, growing food for the animals, nature is important to me.
You see, if you really want to motivate people to take constructive action, hope is a much, much stronger motivator, and it motivates people to find ways to make things better.
forget hope, common sense eventually rules. hopes are often false and leads many down a path that can destroy them. we can't hope the world better, it's not scientific at all. nothing like a dashed hope to hammer the last nail into a coffin. don't worry about it, the earth will be here still after the next extinction, and we all know that will happen, science seems to concur on that. it won't be us that destroys the earth, that's ridiculous to think that, not unless we blow it apart, and i guess that could happen if we keep fucking with fusion or discover the use of dark matter, but I'm not scared of that. live and let die.
So what differences can I make? I can choose to use non-poluting or low-poluting transportation options, such as walk or ride a bike if the distance is not excessive.
yeah, that is what we need to do, but we're not doing this at all, if you look at the emerging countries, you'll see we're taking them away from riding bikes and mass transportation, and why is that, they want, they want what we already have. they want our cell phones, they want our cars, they want want want. there is no bloody way we can stop that, again this is common sense. we've had our time, now they want theirs, and I don't blame them. so in another couple decades there will be billions of more vehicles on the road instead of bicycles. they want to take vacations like the selfish people over here do, you know the ones who believe in AGW but still get in a car or on a place and take off someplace totally ignoring the fact that they are the two things we can all make a difference about, but be damned if they'll give that up. even you did a trip to the mountains, you used a vehicle to get there, I can guarantee that you didn't think about the pollution you were producing SU, that's ok with me, I understand but it does go against everything about AGW doesn't it. it proved we really don't care, we're all selfish.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

The Devil's Advocate in me states, however, that even hypothesising the rosiest of outcomes in the West - let's assume all of Europe and US suddenly go max on the sustainability.. - collectively they're still p***ing in the wind when one considers the outputs from China, Africa, and India, for example.
that's correct ebs... if we think we can control these emerging economies who only WANT what we have, they're completely mistaken. that is not going to happen. those billions of people are the next challenge. WHERE DO WE GET OFF TELLING THEM WHAT TO DO WHAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE AND STILL DO?????????? that's not logical nor will it ever happen. and there is no way they can afford these cars which pollute in the manufacturing anyway. this is impossible, it will never happen. that is what the IPCC and the UN have in mind with the carbon tax credits. to give money to emerging small countries for us to pollute more and they can't even grow therefore creating a dependency on western funds to survive. it will eventually choke them out as being anything but a third world country. I find westerners disgustingly selfish and ignorant to other countries and peoples suffering.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

yes, I am back from holidays :)
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

i was reading an article, i should say ad about LED's, their use, power consumption, and cost and easily could see (pun) how we could do the right thing on saving energy therefor the environment and here is what i found.

they can be used for almost anything, they have a wide spectrum and can fulfill the needs of many applications......
governments are not committing to saving the environment and here is why:

instead of funneling the money to corrupt groups such as the UN and IPCC, why don't they pay for these new lights that provide a minimum of 75% reduction in energy use.

i ask everyone who reads this, have you replaced the incandescent lighting in your homes?? who here has a complete LED lighting???? WHO has done their job and replaced these lights?

if anyone has, congrats to them, they must be rich. these lights cost in order of 20 times the cost of a regular incandescent bulb, so to me most people don't do it. so my question is:

why does the government not step in and force the reduction of cost of these energy saving lighting systems??? why do we hand over money to crooks who use fear to drive our thinking into submitting to their beliefs when they themselves have the power (joke) to have an impact on energy use therefore reducing emissions?

the use of LED's in street lighting and homes is a BIG reduction in energy yet they make it impossible for most of the average person to replace the old style lighting. it makes no sense that we give the fear mongers all our money and trust while they full well know they can have an impact just by using the stolen tax money from us to get rid of this high cost. they can most certainly do this right now! it's an easy thing to do yet we do not see it.
IT'S ABOUT MONEY, nothing to do with save the world, NOTHING! this is an easy thing to understand and easy to put in motion yet the price of these LED's is through the roof. there is no need for tax dollars going toward these groups, the money should be going towards this. I'm insulted that most people can claim AGW and yet they have not replaced their own lighting sources and have not come to the conclusion that we can't afford them because our government has not redirected the funds to where it belongs. THIS TO ME IS PROOF that they don't operate on common sense, instead they work by the dollar.

so if anyone here dares to say they're doing all that is needed to save the planet, i'll make this claim that they're not doing what they should be doing.

it is simple, yet the government refuses to do the right thing, instead they use fear and then tax the schit out of people, make us feel guilty likes it's all our fault yet here we are with a perfectly good solution. last time i checked there were millions of street lights that can use the tech. our money is not going to the correct place. these companies who build these LED lighting systems should be subsidized to make this affordable, but no, the gov wants us to pay through the nose for something they can RIGHT NOW do and make affordable. I REFUSE TO GIVE THESE CLIMATE GOOFS ANY MONEY, they fund their own agendas, of course they need money to pay their bills, so again, it's all about MONEY.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

on another note, there is another way to get dollars that can curb and benefit the planet and that is...

tax the schit out of all luxury vehicles, tax heavily anyone who feels like they need to get away and fly off to some resort ( and planes are now the #1 polluter of the sky, billions of people every year flying all over the place and not for one second thinking about the damage it can do even though they believe in AGW), this really pisses me off, hypocritical azzes who in my opinion just don't care as long as it suites their needs. why the hell would i want to believe anything they spew about fear of the end of the world while they still do these things they claim is damaging the environment, WHY?

i can go on for a long time about people who scream that we need to reduce reliance on petro fuels and coal yet despicably keep using them, they can all %$^#&%^$*^%$. HYPOCRITES.

to deny this logic is complete selfishness, now who is the denier.

to use money to save the world is OK provided it is spent well, not on those clowns, don't let fear run your lives people, use your own common sense, force our government into the correct actions and DO SOMETHING, do the right thing by not giving in, conserve all you can, do not spread fear, spread intelligence. there is no need to hate petro, there is a GREAT need to fix our governments tactics on control of population and our tax dollars. spending money is fine as long as it goes to the right place.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

oh, for the above, notice there there is minimal use of skewed numbers, no dopy graphs, no scientific claims, just PURE COMMON SENSE.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

hmmm, it's June 5th and there is snow falling in two Canadian provinces still, near 0.c in central Ontario. will July have snow is possible, I've never ever heard of it before.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

http://news.yahoo.com/hidden-volcanoes- ... 06544.html

they are finding more volcanoes, they are now beginning to relay the truth, it's only a matter of time that ALL reasons will come to the table, not just CO2 levels, bla bla bla, 97%, not a bloody chance.

http://phys.org/news/2014-06-major-west ... ermal.html
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Gambit37 »

Please could you refrain from posting lots of consecutive posts. It would be much better for you to wait for someone to reply before adding more information.

At the moment it seems as if you're just talking with yourself and it's putting other people off from adding to the thread.

Thank you.
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

there was 4 days in between Gambit, this is my forum posting, please reframe from trying to control it. close this forum and i'll be pissed at you. there is no need to do anything to these posts.

Thank you.

speak to Beowuuf before doing anything rash here.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: What the... Snow in June, then in August!

Post by Gambit37 »

It's OK, I'm not going to close it. I made a polite request for you to consider other contributors, that is all.
Locked