I have a company car that's a hybrid and I actually love it... Its my first hybrid I've ever driven.
-
Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!
Learning Global Warming facts and fiction
- Thread starter Stormlover
- Start date
- Status
There’s intimacy to be had elsewhere like in the design of the car and the touchscreen inside you control a bunch on the inside
LickWx
Member
Ehhh. Idk man it’s less connection to your vehicle . You don’t control it , it controls you lol.
Avalanche
Member
I love turbochargers. I dont mind a hybrid blend with charge and gas, as long as the exhaust goes through a turbine then back into the forcefed manifold
@me next time too. Of course that rhetoric is hyperbole but it's spewed daily by those with an agenda. Many in high places have claimed we have 12 years or less left, it's why I said it
That graph you posted actual observations? Of course not, carbon dating or some science or technology. Models can't predict the weather 5 days out yet I'm supposed to believe we know what the climate was like, precisely, thousands of years ago.
@NickyBGuarantee hard to take you serious when you claim Teslas are cheap
I didn’t mean to say they are cheap but they are worth the money mainly for the fact that you’ll have to not spend a whole lot after u buy them. That and they retain their value off the lot. You buy them at 30,000 and you’ll sell them at 30,000 it’s more of an investment tbh
Yes we can use carbon dating and all that to figure out a general idea of what it was back then and it didn’t have the extreme increase or decrease in temps (because there’s no carbon emissions in extreme excess back then obviously ).. with all the extremely good data we get the past several decades we can clearly see a trend that is clearly not leveling out in any way and to ignore it and look the other way and try to pivot to say well we don’t know the exact temperature it was on every spot on the earth in 1200 is a bit ridiculous when we have been able to record data very well over the past 200 years or so and the clear trend is there and the clear science is there. Don’t listen to people with an agenda listen to the scientists and meteorologists who know what they are talking about and those people will tell you the same things I’m trying to convey
Who is ignoring it and looking the other way? Confucious say, read more with less arrogance and you may go far
LickWx
Member
Senior year of high school I read a ton of books I checked out form my public library on this all. These books were written by paleo climatologists . People with an in-depth knowledge of geology and climate . They had all the insight into the past… and you know what they all concluded … this world has seen some swings and changes so extreme and unimaginable to us today and we are in fact in a very comfortable , surprisingly stable period . You ever heard of the younger dryas ? My boy you got some reading to do ! I should start reading those again . It’s what shaped my opinion.
Got to finish my book on the rise and fall of dinosaurs and investing first . Read !
I know about younger dryas that period of time was over 1000 years of time where that change occurred .. and that was a period of rapid cooling that took place .. also this came after a period of rapid warming which melted tons of ice and screwed the Atlantic conveyer and put the globe in a fat ole ice age… these types of changes can cause major downturn effects the difference between now and then? Although the change back then was natural but still considered ‘rapid’ this change still occurred over 100s of years .. right now our averages are rising every year and the rate is quite alarming for a 40 year sample
LickWx
Member
False that changed occurred quite literally overnight . It wasn’t 100s of years it was a handful . It was a very violent switch .
Anyone who doesn’t believe the globe is warming at an alarming rate and that these changes can have big ramifications in OUR lifetime is ignoring and looking the other way .. and telling me to read? @lick I have taken classes at university taught by scientists and climatologists and that is where I get my information from .. I won’t be told that what I’ve learned from them is not good information
You’re right 40-50 years it took to put those rapid weather changing conditions into place across the globe .. now our earth is doing the opposite and warming rapidly and over 40-50 more years what happens then? Should we not be worried about that?
LickWx
Member
Always question everything . Have no trust in someone who presents debatable topics to you as unquestionable fact . You want to contribute something meaningful to this world ? Question everything , that’s how new discoveries are made. I also refuse to trust scientists who do not question things , and are part of a political issue .
You do realize the amount of bad and bs studies that get published right ? It’s not a small number , it’s theorized to be more than half . You know why that is ? For one you can make the stats sing for you whatever you want through various tricks . Second journals are like a business , they don’t like to publish studies that have already been done, so you don’t get to see whether the results are truly replicable or not . Third , they do not like studies that show “ negative results “ meaning no breakthrough . They love breakthroughs . Breakthroughs sell . Oh and the extent is horrible , a study on some of the top cancer studies out there revealed many of them did not have replicable results .
Many of those professors unfortunately have an agenda and as such most are alarmist.
I haven't read anything from one single member on here denying that we are currently in a warmer climate but rather question the reasons and challenge the alarmist views. It seems if one isn't all in on the sky is falling narrative then your somehow looking the other way. Btw I had a professor tell me back in the late 1900s, that Rocky Mount would be ocean front property in his lifetime. Sadly he has passed and I still have to drive almost 3 hours to the beach.
It wasn’t presented as undoubted fact but there was PLENTY on science to back up claims and that was what the whole class was about showing the evidence selling about what the evidence could mean and the implications for the world. Realistic best case scenarios/worst case/ standard scenarios… the thing is what if it’s right and we’re just stuck here questioning everything? What happens if the science turns out to be right what do we do then? When it’s too late? Just watch? Why not try and stop it and reduce emissions and see how the climate adjusts after that? I mean we never questioned the scientists when they figured out the pollutants of chlorine and bromine into the atmosphere were depleting the ozone layer .. if this continued it would have completely depleted and we all would be dead right now .. but we listened we stopped polluting those and the ozone layer stopped getting shredded and has now recently been imaged to be finally repairing itself although slowly over the Antarctic
I mean the class was far from an alarming kind of view it was really a class of talking about the realistic outcomes of climate change which are still profound and deadly to property and life but not in the ways the alarmists want you to think. I’m not believing in the fact that everything implodes rapidly but all I’m saying is why do we sit and wait 40-50 years when by then the impacts won’t be able to be reversed? Like in the case of the ozone hole .. obviously more deadly scenario for everyone if we didn’t act when we did that had the potential to kill everyone if we didn’t act when we were seeing the data. We can’t just do nothing though. We can’t find ways and implement them in big factories to help reduce emissions I mean to give America some props we have reduced our carbon emissions a lot but China and all over there have not and have listened little to any guidance this hurts us
I still can't quite understand why the warming is so alarming. Unless we're just frustrated because it doesn't snow as much. A warmer climate is more hospital for plant and animal life than a cold one.
The other problem is that you have key political supporters of doomsday climate change, who lie about virtually anything at the drop of a hat and also refuse to live their lives in the light of the impending calamity, failing to practice what they preach, as it were.
And in lock step with that, you have a myriad of primary news and media outlets declaring every major weather event as a product of climate change. It's preposterous.
And lastly, we have the capability of viewing and measuring the world today in ultra high definition 4k, while we view the climate record in black and white on a 20" screen while wearing glasses with scratched lenses. Yet, we have the audacity to declare this or that with absolute certainly.
When you hear the term "settled science", as is frequently used in the CC debate, that ought to be a big red flag.
Fair points and yes that is one of the causes we talked about in the class .. increased vegetation everywhere as plants won’t need as much carbon to sustain themselves and the warmer climates will expand the areas where certain vegetation can survive and thrive .. this will also increase the areas where thick amount of masquitos will be able to travel and this could in turn spread certain diseases to areas that don’t normally have to deal with them and that can cause some issues in and of itself. Another alarming factor is the warming climate will increasingly melt the ice and such in arctic regions.. in the absolute worst case scenario of us doing nothing and continuing to release carbon like no ones business would cause major amount of ice loss and eventually melt all that ice up this would raise water levels enough to cover up any major coastal cities I think like 50 miles or so inland (again in a relative worst case scenario over the course of 50 years or so) this is of course not including the Antarctic as melting up all that ice and such would take an extremely long period of time as even above normal temperatures down there are still around -20 or so degrees so it’s finna take a hell of a lot of warning to really change things down there at it’s core. But realistically the ice in Greenland can melt away and cause these issues for coastal communities.. yes the ice comes roaring back in the winter months as it cycles all the time the key here is over time we get less ice in the colder months and much less ice IN our warmer months .. a slow but steady metric that is measured every year .. these are only a few effects that can eventually be alarming for us in our lifetime
This helps show it a bit better lighter colors are earlier years and then the darker colors as the most recent years and of course 2012 as the marker as the lowest extent of sea ice we’ve seen from that bunson burner of a year .. sea ice still going through the cycles but over time there is less and less to go about the further along we go .. where does this water go? The oceans which then slowly raises the low and the high tides ever so slightly as time goes forward 
Downeastnc
Member
For me its pretty simple, the earth has a system of cycles for dealing with CO2, humans releasing 30ish gigatons of that sequestered CO2 a year is not part of that cycle.....the radiative forcing of CO2 is hard science we know how much more warming a given area has per doubling of CO2. We know that CO2 PPM is increasing at a rate far beyond anything in the record and that completely makes sense given humans releasing massive amounts annually. So its is without question that humans are responsible for much of the recent and rapid increase in global CO2. There is also no question this is causing warming, though the exact amount is very unsettled science IMO....
Basically anyone that tells you that either the earth is doomed and we are all going to die soon or that manmade AGW does not exist is a fool with a agenda.
The problem is the problem is huge with so many working parts and relationships between earth systems that we dont have a good grasp on that its damn near impossible to "know" anything with any certainty. Everyone should desire clean abundant energy and the end of fossil fuel use......but their are smart ways and dumb ways to get there and it wont happen in the next few decades. I do think the tech is there though to get us moving that way quickly.
Basically anyone that tells you that either the earth is doomed and we are all going to die soon or that manmade AGW does not exist is a fool with a agenda.
The problem is the problem is huge with so many working parts and relationships between earth systems that we dont have a good grasp on that its damn near impossible to "know" anything with any certainty. Everyone should desire clean abundant energy and the end of fossil fuel use......but their are smart ways and dumb ways to get there and it wont happen in the next few decades. I do think the tech is there though to get us moving that way quickly.
MichaelJ
Member
My late Brother was a PHD in Atmospheric Sciences from MIT and he absolutely thought AGW was WAY overblown and would not amount to a serious problem on earth for several hundred years if ever. Is the earth warming? Yes. Has it warmed even more than this before? Yes. Has the level of CO2 been 3 times what it s today? Yes. Has Greenland been mostly ice free in the Southern part before? Yes. Has all the arctic ice disappeared before? Yes.
Just for thought here, if you exploded 500 nuclear bombs in Antarctica it would amount to a 20% melting, over the next 50,000 years that is how massive the ice is there. Remember humans function best in a warmer climate, not a colder one. You see people saying what if, why not just eliminate all carbon from human effects, number 1 that will never happen, #2 why should we go headlong into hell of starvation, disease and economic disaster is by spending trillions and trillions on a computer model prediction. Question for you Nicky, what should the "normal" temperature on Earth be and the amount of time period it is measured, and has it ever been that on this planet? Yes I took several classes at the University of Miami on Climate (and had learned a great deal from my Brother) and the professor kicked me out because I was asking too many uncomfortable questions. This is a trojan horse for socialistic and complete control of the population by eliminating dissenting opinions in our Universities and in the Published articles much like we see happening today. This is all my opinion and as of right now, that is still allowed outside of academic circles
Just for thought here, if you exploded 500 nuclear bombs in Antarctica it would amount to a 20% melting, over the next 50,000 years that is how massive the ice is there. Remember humans function best in a warmer climate, not a colder one. You see people saying what if, why not just eliminate all carbon from human effects, number 1 that will never happen, #2 why should we go headlong into hell of starvation, disease and economic disaster is by spending trillions and trillions on a computer model prediction. Question for you Nicky, what should the "normal" temperature on Earth be and the amount of time period it is measured, and has it ever been that on this planet? Yes I took several classes at the University of Miami on Climate (and had learned a great deal from my Brother) and the professor kicked me out because I was asking too many uncomfortable questions. This is a trojan horse for socialistic and complete control of the population by eliminating dissenting opinions in our Universities and in the Published articles much like we see happening today. This is all my opinion and as of right now, that is still allowed outside of academic circles
Downeastnc
Member
I mean look at sea levels and temps when the ice was all melted and CO2 was that high.....the current short term rapid rise in CO2 is pretty much all us.....the consequences of this have yet to be realized, and using the results of past instances when many variables were different is not something either side of the issue should do, a lot of things can and have changed in that time. Your assumption that a warmer planet will be better for humans is also a stretch, it will have a lot to do with where you live. Humans need to focus on reducing fossil fuel use where ever and when ever possible if for no other reason than we are using it much much quicker than the earth can create it.
Most people do not care very much about the planet. Even the loudest mouthpieces for CC don't do a lot to curb their own energy use. You ride up and down any road and see piles of trash everywhere. It's not just one person doing that. Anyway, we ideally should absolutely move toward renewable clean energy. It just makes sense for numerous reasons. But how we get there, as you said, matters a great deal.
MichaelJ
Member
Personally I think the Earths population is getting out of control and will stress the food producing areas to harvest enough to feed people. However, one of the sacrosanct beliefs is that we are warming too fast and getting close to a "tipping point" with absolutely no real science backing that up, whatever the hell it even means. So if our CO2 is inordinately high for the past 50 years, then how can you say that warming is a bad thing? The earth produces more food now than ever and we are making adjustments for the increasing population despite the very small warming (about 1C) in the past 100 years. If we can reduce the CO2 levels without bankrupting the financial system, great let's go ahead. Just remember the law of unintended consequences before we start banning things and dissenting voices
BHS1975
Member
Yeah some warming is fine but as we get past 1.5C theres going to be more problems with some off those catching us off guard being that we don't have a good enough understanding of the consequences. Also you can't say that this or that event was or wasn't caused by CC as weather and climate are intertwined just like space and time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MichaelJ
Member
This is correct. we don't even know if there will be any consequences nor whether they would be good or bad ones. This is why premature and constant attributions of EVERY weather phenomenon to AGW is impossible to know. For every instance of severe weather that is pointed too, I could give an equal of greater event much earlier in our past before CO2 was even considered a "bad" gas
MichaelJ
Member
The NSIDC graph has not been available for Arctic sea ice extent for about 10 days now, I did pull up the DMI graph which is showing a pretty healthy ice rebound so far this season.
The point is we’re staying on the very low portion of normals we should be in the center of the grey on average using prior averages .. we will soon I’m assuming have to adjust these averages down as we are consistently now way below average with regards to sea ice extent.. why would this be? The planet is getting warmer and warmer so more ice melts ..
Every 10 years updated … the jump in only the past 10 years .. do this for another 40-50 years and we’re suddenly supporting weather than never gets that cold year round 
LickWx
Member
Meanwhile Raleigh showed no jump at all. Those averages are one big joke . Asheville warmed massively but Boone cooled. Virginia Beach warmed massively but Richmond cooled the nearby Charlottesville va saw the most warming in the country . Oklahoma City supposedly cooled but Nashville warmed insane amount . It’s all a crock of ---- . Have a feeling that a lot of these places that supposedly warmed a lot will be below average a bit more this decade …
Recent research shows were going to end up leveling off the population growth around probably somewhere near 9-10 billion people .. this is because most areas of the world are now very assimilated with technology and much more developed than they used to be and the average children output in these areas is 1-2 .. now if the average family only has 1-2 kids (obviously generally speaking) those 1-2 kids eventually replace the parents when they die so overpopulation as it used to seem like a big problem is definitely not something we need to worry about anymore
I think you’re wrong at the end of the day if it’s above normal in Charlotte it’s probably above average in Raleigh also
MichaelJ
Member
So explain Antarctica, check it out, the amount of decrease in the Arctic is offset by the increase in sea ice in the Antarctica. Why would this be? Any idea? I do in case you don't
I’ve said it before it’s much harder to melt Antarctica than it is Greenland ice. Temps there at the core are -1000000 degrees even above normal temps there end up being like -20 degrees.
BHS1975
Member
Not to mention in the summer it's still well below freezing. The East Antarctic ice sheet was the first to form about 45 Ma when is was much warmer and will be the last to melt out completely which would take over 5C of warming.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MichaelJ
Member
Just for kicks, go look at the AMO graph and compare it to both the Arctic and Antarctica graphs during the same periods for the amazing correlation.
Avalanche
Member
Wonder if reducing the infamous urban heat island would help any. I know from having the doors and top off in my Jeep when i leave Raleigh and Cary it feels comfortable, but when I reach the lake and west of there Im cold. You can def feel the difference. I dont trust the government yet to solve it, theyll just bankrupt the revenue going into it anyway. There are proposed solutions from the private sector, but no one will step forward in adapting if there cant be a concrete finding in that we are reaponsible for the warming.
If the general public can be made to feel our carbon usage, along with asphalt and a lack of foliage is responsible in our growing warmth, then they will feel compelled to do something about it, but the argument has to be made and believed first.
If the general public can be made to feel our carbon usage, along with asphalt and a lack of foliage is responsible in our growing warmth, then they will feel compelled to do something about it, but the argument has to be made and believed first.
- Status