Page 260 of 366 FirstFirst ... 160210250256257258259260261262263264270310360 ... LastLast
Results 3,886 to 3,900 of 5480
  1. #3886
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    I want to borrow one of these for a couple of days:



    It's a Flakpanzer Gepard (German for 'Cheetah'). It's based on a Leopard 1 tank chasis and sports twin 35mm canons. It's currently being withdrawn from German Army service, so they should be available cheap.

    I think it would make short work of any windfarm & the odd Prius it met along the way.


    The US tried to make a similar vehicle called the Sgt York, but it was awful. It pointed its guns at a bunch of visiting VIPs once, which must have had them diving for cover. Another time it mistook the ventilation fan of a portable toilet for an enemy helicopter & started tracking it. It was cancelled in 1985.

  2. #3887
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,286

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    ^^^ I'd rather see a few passes by an A-10 do the work. Be fun to watch.

    I started reading the comments to the above article.. the first one stands out:

    Jeremy says:
    February 17, 2011 at 9:35 am
    What can RC say about climate-gate now that they’re being caught red-handed doing the very things that the climate-gate e-mails hinted they were doing?

    How can this debacle (love that word, so rarely use it online) not make them all look like total fools bent on lying to the world?

    To re-cap:

    1) Alarmists say skeptics don’t have anything peer-reviewed to point to, so ignore them
    2) Climate-gate exposes gaming of peer-review by alarmists
    3) Alarmists say climate-gate taken out of context, all is well.
    4) Alarmists caught doing what climate-gate had previously illustrated

    …? The reaction posts at RC in the next few weeks should be as interesting as the initial reaction to climate-gate… that is to say, they’ll probably clam up for a while.
    Not to worry... I'm absolutely sure they will immediately convene a board of their "peers". Said board will undoubtedly absolve themselves of any wrongdoing. At which point the loyal cult members will be able to say "see.. they investigated and the results were nothing changed!"... just like climategate. A reoccurring theme..
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  3. #3888
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Quote Originally Posted by Enmore View Post
    I want to borrow one of these for a couple of days:



    It's a Flakpanzer Gepard (German for 'Cheetah'). It's based on a Leopard 1 tank chasis and sports twin 35mm canons. It's currently being withdrawn from German Army service, so they should be available cheap.

    I think it would make short work of any windfarm & the odd Prius it met along the way.


    The US tried to make a similar vehicle called the Sgt York, but it was awful. It pointed its guns at a bunch of visiting VIPs once, which must have had them diving for cover. Another time it mistook the ventilation fan of a portable toilet for an enemy helicopter & started tracking it. It was cancelled in 1985.
    It sure beats shaking your sword at them .
    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

  4. #3889
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    ^^^ I'd rather see a few passes by an A-10 do the work. Be fun to watch.

    I started reading the comments to the above article.. the first one stands out:



    Not to worry... I'm absolutely sure they will immediately convene a board of their "peers". Said board will undoubtedly absolve themselves of any wrongdoing. At which point the loyal cult members will be able to say "see.. they investigated and the results were nothing changed!"... just like climategate. A reoccurring theme..
    I have a good friend who worked all the small bases in Germany back in the day. Those and a nice AC-130 gunship would convert that real estate into something worthwhile.
    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

  5. #3890
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    You'd think there must be some sabotage going on with the damn things. Years ago I had a wander round a wind farm. It was remote, completely unmanned and you could walk right up the towers. It was just me and a few sheep.


    We're in the wrong racket:

    How much do 'carbon professionals' earn?

    Second annual carbon salary survey published recently shows 7% wage increase in past 12 months


    The latest Carbon Salary Survey was published recently by Acre Resources and Acona with 994 professionals taking part. Now in its second year, the survey aims to plot the developing climate change and carbon job markets including; job functions, salaries and job satisfaction levels amongst other key indices.

    The survey arguably defines carbon professionals as those working in:

    • Renewable energy and clean technology
    • Clean development mechanism/Joint implementation (CDM/JI)
    • Verified emissions reductions (VER)
    • Carbon finance/brokering
    • Carbon/Climate Change law, policy or regulation
    • Climate Change strategy
    • Energy management and efficiency
    • Carbon management
    • Sustainability

    According to the survey the most popular areas to work in globally are energy efficiency and consulting around CDM and JI projects (low carbon projects eligible for increased funding through carbon credits under the Kyoto Protocol).

    Energy efficiency professionals have taken the top slot for the second year running indicating how important demand side reduction is for organisations right now as energy prices escalate and environmental taxes begin to bite.
    Vermin

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainabl...esources-acona
    Last edited by Enmore; 02-17-2011 at 10:19 PM.

  6. #3891
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,286

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    ^^^ No sheet. Selling off the rights to ghost farts is far more profitable than logic dictates it should be.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  7. #3892
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    A couple of interesting thoughts:

    http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/TableOfCont.html

    A Brief History of Ice Ages and Warming

    Global warming started long before the "Industrial Revolution" and the invention of the internal combustion engine. Global warming began 18,000 years ago as the earth started warming its way out of the Pleistocene Ice Age-- a time when much of North America, Europe, and Asia lay buried beneath great sheets of glacial ice.

    Earth's climate and the biosphere have been in constant flux, dominated by ice ages and glaciers for the past several million years. We are currently enjoying a temporary reprieve from the deep freeze.

    Approximately every 100,000 years Earth's climate warms up temporarily. These warm periods, called interglacial periods, appear to last approximately 15,000 to 20,000 years before regressing back to a cold ice age climate. At year 18,000 and counting our current interglacial vacation from the Ice Age is much nearer its end than its beginning.
    As much as this is all well and good(?), many ignore that the likely #1 cause of extinction level events (ELEs) are meteor, comet and asteroid strikes. One happened about 13,000 years ago that supposedly dug out Hudson Bay and finished species like the wooly mammoth. Others have occurred that are believed to actually have caused eccentric tilts to the earth, changes in rotation speed- even displacement from previous solar orbits. Extensive meteor storms are also believed to account for a number of ELEs as they not only struck the earth numerous times but also reawakened volcanic activity.

    A short (though debatable) synoptic:
    http://www.scientificpsychic.com/etc.../timeline.html

    Yet each time the earth rallied as well as the life.

    While I would not count an Ice Age as a potential human ELE, I think it would be a huge population reduction event. That's because you can't grow anything on glaciers and glaciers could blanket most of North America. The reduction of resource availability and habitable landmass would severely reduce human population- I'd estimate a kill-off of over 90% of the current level.

    Point is: Global Warming? You better hope for it.
    Last edited by AeroSim; 02-18-2011 at 10:08 AM.
    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

  8. #3893
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Carbon Trust funding cut by 40%

    Cuts to the government's low-carbon agency will cancel grants to biofuel projects and cause dozens of redundancies

    Damian Carrington


    The government's leading low-carbon agency has had its funding cut by 40%, causing the cancellation of grants to a major biofuel scheme and other projects, and dozens of redundancies.

    The Carbon Trust, whose mission is "to accelerate the move to a low-carbon economy", will receive £50m from the government in 2011-12. It will end free on-site energy surveys for businesses and 35 of its 216 employees will lose their jobs.
    Good, ••••••• paracites.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...st-funding-cut

  9. #3894
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    John Holdren relishing Congress climate opportunity

    By Pallab Ghosh

    The US president's chief science adviser says the nation's current efforts to tackle climate change are insufficient in the long-term.

    Speaking to BBC News at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) meeting in Washington DC, Professor John Holdren said the current US Congress was unlikely to pass new legislation to put a price on CO2 emissions.

    President Obama's administration's efforts, he said, would instead have to focus on developing cleaner technologies, expanding the use of nuclear power and improving energy efficiency.

    But he admits that in the long term, these initiatives on their own will not be enough.

    "Ultimately, we will have to look to a future Congress for the more comprehensive approach that climate change will require," he said.

    For the time being, Professor Holdren faces a more sceptical Congress than he would like, and one that proposes a series of congressional hearings to assess the science of climate change.

    Professor Holdren says he is relishing the opportunity.

    "Any objective look at what science has to say about climate change ought to be sufficient to persuade reasonable people that the climate is changing and that humans are responsible for a substantial part of that - and that these changes are doing harm and will continue to do more harm unless we start to reduce our emissions.

    "If Congress wants to have a series of hearings to illuminate these issues, they are going to get illuminated."

    Professor Holdren accepts that confidence in climate science has been dented by recent scandals.

    But he believes public reaction was temporary and short-lived.

    "I'm not so sure there's a lot of new scepticism in the climate change debate," he said.

    "People are seeing the impact of climate change around them in extraordinary patterns of floods and droughts, wildfires, heatwaves and powerful storms.

    "I think it is going to be very hard to persuade people that climate change is somehow a fraud."
    Beardy weirdy Fail

    ..and so much for confusing weather with climate.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12508050

  10. #3895
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Quote Originally Posted by Enmore View Post
    Good, ••••••• paracites.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...st-funding-cut
    Here's some hope for you- suggest the idea to your voters:

    The Republican-controlled House voted to shield greenhouse-gas polluters and privately owned colleges from federal regulators on Friday, strengthening the pro-business emphasis of legislation that also would chop $61 billion from government spending.
    ....

    The move to stop the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse-gas polluters came from Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, who said his congressional district is home to more oil refineries than any other.

    "We're in the midst of a massive economic downturn, and the last thing we need to do is shoot ourselves in the foot with unnecessary, expensive new regulations that are on business and industry," he said.

    Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...#ixzz1EPlogR7X
    Here's some more hope in what to do with the savings-



    Last edited by AeroSim; 02-19-2011 at 10:00 AM.
    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

  11. #3896
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,286

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    EPA and IPCC can go pound sand... the cult is not pleased about the prospect of having to fund their own religious expansion.

    House votes to defund IPCC

    From Climate Science Watch , their take on the issue, though a bit political, shows how it is viewed:

    Just before 2 a.m. on February 19, the war on climate science showed its grip on the U.S. House of Representatives as it voted to eliminate U.S. funding for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The Republican majority, on a mostly party-line vote of 244-179, went on record as essentially saying that it no longer wishes to have the IPCC prepare its comprehensive international climate science assessments. Transcript of floor debate follows.




    The amendment was sponsored by second-term Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Missouri), who obviously knows nothing about climate science or the IPCC, and I expect could care less. His talking points were clearly provided by some denial machine operative and Mr. Leutkemeyer simply followed the script. Leading off with a reference to the stolen climate scientists emails (‘climategate’), he said:

    Luetkemeyer: Scientists manipulated climate data, suppressed legitimate arguments in peer-reviewed journals, and researchers were asked to destroy emails, so that a small number of climate alarmists could continue to advance their environmental agenda.

    Since then, more than 700 acclaimed international scientists have challenged the claims made by the IPCC, in this comprehensive 740-page report. These 700 scientists represent some of the most respected institutions at home and around the world, including the U.S. Departments of Energy and Defense, U.S. Air Force and Navy, and even the Environmental Protection Agency.

    For example, famed Princeton University physicist Dr. Robert Austin, who has published 170 scientific papers and was elected a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Austin told a congressional committee that, unfortunately, climate has become a political science. It is tragic the some perhaps well-meaning but politically motivated scientists who should know better have whipped up a global frenzy about a phenomenon which is statistically questionable at best.

    Mr. Chairman, if the families in my district have been able to tighten their belts, surely the federal government can do the same and stop funding an organization that is fraught with waste and abuse. My amendment simply says that no funds in this bill can go to the IPCC. This would save taxpayers millions of dollars this year and millions of dollars in years to come. In fact, the President has requested an additional $13 million in his fiscal 2012 budget request.

    My constituents should not have to continue to foot the bill for an organization to keep producing corrupt findings that can be used as justification to impose a massive new energy tax on every American.
    That is now the prevailing viewpoint of the majority party in the U.S. House of Representatives.

    more here

    =========================================================

    This comes on the heels of defunding some EPA programs and voting to take control of GHG regulations away from the EPA.

    House votes to block EPA’s global warming power

    (AP)

    The Republican-controlled House has voted to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases that scientists say cause global warming.

    The 249-177 vote added the regulation ban to a sweeping spending bill that would fund the government through Sept. 30. The restriction is opposed by the Obama administration, which is using its regulatory powers to curb greenhouse gases after global warming legislation collapsed last year. The administration also says the ban would cost thousands of construction jobs.

    full story here
    Now if there were only some way to separate the US institutions funding for MMGW "research". Probably one of the many reasons they changed the name to "climate change". So they could use any monetary resources (tax dollars) to push MMGW and claim they are simply studying real "climate change"... the naturally occurring phenomena none of the warmer cults models has been able to accurately predict short of some pretty drastic "Mannian" datum adjustments.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  12. #3897
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,286

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Well that worked out as a nice tie in...

    Congress to NASA: Study Space! (Not Climate. That’s Not Space.)
    The budget battle has come to NASA, where a massive amount of money is being spent on something that has nothing to do with NASA's mission.


    Members of Congress are asking something novel of NASA: to actually study space, not global warming. Representatives Bill Posey (R-FL), Sandy Adams (R-FL), Rob Bishop (R-UT) and others have sent a letter to House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-KY) and Commerce, Justice, and Science Subcommittee Chairman Frank Wolf (R-VA) asking for NASA to launch their efforts in a new direction — the old one.

    For many years, NASA has been spending vast sums of money to study global warming, despite the efforts already undertaken at other federal agencies where such research is more appropriate. The letter asks that NASA refocus on what it was created to do, which is to maintain and develop our space program.

    The amount of money being spent to study global warming, as a percentage of NASA’s budget, is startling — especially when one considers this is not part of NASA’s original mission. In budget year 2010, NASA spent 7.5% of its funding — over $1B — to study global warming. On top of that — the vast majority of federal stimulus money given to NASA in 2010 was spent on studying global warming.

    As a whole, the U.S. federal government has spent $8.7 billion dollars on global warming studies — just in the past year! Many of the sixteen separate agencies doing this work were performing redundant research. In a time of federal spending cuts that are sure to come, much of this redundancy certainly can and must be eliminated, saving taxpayers billions. Certainly NASA should be one of the first to see funding drastically cut, or eliminated entirely, in this area.

    The principal arm of global warming research for NASA is the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). That’s “Space” Studies, not climate. The Institute is located in New York City on the campus of Columbia University. The homepage of GISS states:

    Research at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) emphasizes a broad study of global change.
    No mention of anything to do with space exploration. How odd. The overview continues:

    … which is an interdisciplinary initiative addressing natural and man-made changes in our environment that occur on various time scales — from one-time forcings such as volcanic explosions, to seasonal and annual effects such as El Niño, and on up to the millennia of ice ages — and that affect the habitability of our planet.
    Under the section titled “More Research News & Features,” there are seven different news items, all dealing with global warming. Nothing about space or manned space missions or anything at all up there. It’s as if GISS has launched itself into an entirely different orbit, unrelated to its founding documents. The Goddard Institute for Climate Studies would be a much more accurate representation, though I think Dr. Robert Goddard would be surprised to learn how much influence he must have had in the field of climate research, rather than in developing liquid fueled rockets.

    The shift of the GISS research effort is mysterious, but so is the trend of their long-term temperature records. In the late 1990s, GISS published a graph of the United States yearly average temperature from 1880 to 1998. From the graph it is clear that 1934 is nearly 1 degree Fahrenheit warmer than 1998, a very substantial amount. In fact, the graph ranked the four warmest years in order as: 1934, 1921, 1931, and 1998. But by 2009, an updated version of the graph shows some dramatic and remarkable changes: 1934, 1921, and 1931 are all now cooler than 1998!

    Somehow in the past decade, these three years that concluded seven or eight decades ago managed to cool themselves, and 1998 found a way to warm itself, despite this all requiring time travel and maybe a volcano and a second sun.

    How could “climate change” of this nature and magnitude take place when the readings were already determined? Apparently GISS found a way to “adjust” the temperatures of the past and present, by “changing” them. The obvious result of the change is twofold. The warmest decade of the last 130 years in the United States, the 1930s, has been “cooled” to make the current time period appear warmer. Another result of the change is that the years after 1970 have been adjusted warmer, to make the slope of temperature rise since then appear steeper and more significant.

    Not only is GISS studying global warming, they are actually creating it! I guess all those billions of dollars were enough to buy a few degrees here and there.

    This interesting interpretation of temperature by GISS is not limited to the United States data. The differences between the GISS global average temperature and the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) satellite-derived average global temperature is revealing. Since 1998, the difference in the global temperature anomaly between GISS and UAH has increased to .72 degrees Fahrenheit, with GISS being the warmer. This difference is 70% of all the global warming anomaly since 1850! Some of this difference is due to the fact that GISS uses the period from 1951 to 1980 as its base period to calculate its anomalies. The period from 1945 to 1976 was a period of global cooling. By using this colder period as its base for calculating anomalies GISS gets larger warm temperature anomalies in its current evaluation of global temperature. The UAH uses the last 30 years as its base period.

    As a consequence of these differences we get conflicting trends. The UAH data shows a decline of average global temperature of .34 degrees Fahrenheit during January 2011. On the other hand GISS found an increase of .27 degrees Fahrenheit during the same month. From March of 2010 to January 2011, UAH data shows a substantial global temperature drop of 1.01 degrees Fahrenheit. GISS was showing a downward trend in global temperature of 1.03 degrees Fahrenheit from March 2010 to December 2010, but then reversed the trend in January. It was almost as if GISS had enough of this temperature drop, and called a halt to it.

    It appears that the climate in Washington is changing. We may see a significant drop in funding and a refocusing of NASA’s mission back to where it belongs, in space. The Goddard Institute for Data Adjustment may find that climate change does indeed have significant implications for the future, but those changes could be in a direction that GISS did not anticipate, and this time their attempts to change that direction may be out of their control.

    Art Horn spent 25 years working in television as a meteorologist. He now is an independent meteorologist and speaker who lives in Connecticut. He can be contacted at skychaserman@cox.net.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  13. #3898
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Well that it good news. There also needs to be a massive purge of the rent seekers who perpetuated the scam, starting with Hansen at NASA.

  14. #3899
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,286

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Quote Originally Posted by Enmore View Post
    Well that it good news. There also needs to be a massive purge of the rent seekers who perpetuated the scam, starting with Hansen at NASA.
    I'm thinking RICO action... put these snake oil salesmen behind bars where they belong.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  15. #3900
    Joined
    Jun 2003
    Location
    SO CAL USA
    Age
    68
    Posts
    1,602

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    asrock x370 taichi,16g gskill flarex3200 wd250mu 3wdblack 1 tera
    Asrock 990FX FX8120 8G Gskill 2133 2x WD2T 6.0 pc p+c 950w
    Asrock 890FX 1090t 2x4 Gskill 1866 RipJaw WD 1T 6.0 mushkin 850w
    DFI 790FXB M3H5 PII 965 8 Gskill RipJaw 1866 WD1T 6.0 ocz 750 w
    DFI 790FXB M3H5 PII 965 2x4 Gskill Rip Jaw 1600 Ocz evo720
    DFI 790FXB M2RSH PII 955 2x1Gskill 1600 Saph 4670 Ocz Evo 720W
    DFI 790FXM2RS PII 720 2x1gig Gskill 1600 Sapphire HD3400
    DFI Lp ultra D SLI Opti 148@300x10 @33c 1 gig Crucial ballistix 4000

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •