Still laughing at global warming.......

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Tom

Well, now there is nice proper little lemming reply.
They tell what is good for you and you snap to attention?

Hey, the science is settled, remember?

[Tom]

And nobody who is telling us how important this is is doing anything themselves - just telling US what to do.

I'm no huckleberry.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by Tom

Well, now there is nice proper little lemming reply.
They tell what is good for you and you snap to attention?
What else do they tell you, how much coffee is enough for you?
How much soda you can have? How much money is too much to have?

that pretty much sums it up. I'm sure he's given Algorilla his open check book

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by Tom

Well, now there is nice proper little lemming reply.
They tell what is good for you and you snap to attention?
What else do they tell you, how much coffee is enough for you?
How much soda you can have? How much money is too much to have?

You probably haven't heard we have a representative democracy. You elect people to make laws. And if you don't like them, you can vote them out. The policy makers, a.k.a., the Congress and the Legislatures made policy. That's what is in the Constitution. The Executive Branch implements policy. The judicial branch determines the constitutionality of policy.

56% of Americans can't name the three branches of government. So no surprise here.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

56% of Americans can't name the three branches of government. So no surprise here.

Larry, Curly, and Moe.

What do I win.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

You probably haven't heard we have a representative democracy. You elect people to make laws. And if you don't like them, you can vote them out. The policy makers, a.k.a., the Congress and the Legislatures made policy. That's what is in the Constitution. The Executive Branch implements policy. The judicial branch determines the constitutionality of policy.

56% of Americans can't name the three branches of government. So no surprise here.

And as you know, the government cherry pick what law it will enforce.
We do NOT have a representative government., At best, we have a reprehensible government.

The Executive Branch is thoroughly corrupt and not fit to make policy.
That 56% of the people, mostly democrats, are the reason for this.

You weather wackos cannot even answer my two simple questions - what is the target temperature, and how much progress have we made after all these years and all these billions of dollars?

You have idea where you want to be and no idea how you are doing getting there. But we need a few more billions right away.

And hcap calls ME dumb?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by Tom

You weather wackos cannot even answer my two simple questions - what is the target temperature, and how much progress have we made after all these years and all these billions of dollars?

I answered the first question. If the climate folks had their druthers, they'd say the target temperature has passed, so no more increase. And the political answer is that the people who are elected to make those decisions have to determine the balance between expenditures and results. When they do we'll have that answer.

The answer to the second question is that greenhouse gas emissions in the United States have been declining. Obama committed to an 18% reduction by 2017 in Paris and we've already gone past that. Like many problems that took hundreds of years to develop, you don't solve them in a day or a week or a month or a year at bargain basement prices. And those are the best two answers you'll ever get.

Say you have a bad heart and you need some serious surgery. How much would you be willing to spend to save your life? Now I get where you are coming from. As long as you don't figure it is your bad heart, as long as it is someone else's problem, why would you ever worry about spending a nickel? You know, screw the Maldives. They shouldn't have been living there in the first place. Oh, and if you think you're moving to America once the Pacific washes over the island, think again. Can you say sea wall?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by Tom

That 56% of the people, mostly democrats, are the reason for this.

Given that only about 41% of the population is registered as democrat, some of the ignorant must be something else. Is there another party we can choose from?

[Tom]

Of course.
All the republican in congress.
They are yours.

Enjoy.

[Tom]

Can you say sea wall?

I am more interested in a SEE wall.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by chadk66

So once again the ideal temperature of the earth is what again?

Originally Posted by Tom

You weather wackos cannot even answer--- - what is the target temperature

I have argued repeatedly that the accelerating rate global temperatures are increasing is the problem we face. ----No there is no such thing as some "ideal" target----of temperatures we should strive for. A thoroughly bogus question by deniers not getting it.

No informed scientist or climatologists ever remotely suggested we should set that kind of ridiculous goal.

Again,the RATE of change is faster than human civilization can easily adapt to.

The earths past climate is studied. Paleoclimatology shows that there have been hotter and cooler global temperatures historically. BUT humans were not around to face those extremes---and most importantly in almost all cases of previous extremes, excerpt catastrophic volcanic eruptions and asteroid strikes---- climate did not change over very brief periods. The current rapid increase in temperatures since 1880 is geophysical speaking, in a "blink of an eye". ONLY a few hundred years.

Deniers dragging their feet and burying their heads in the sand are standing in the way. Debating what can be done is needed, but claiming humanity is not altering anything on the planet is absurd.

[hcap]

Climatologists compare historical temperature to selected base periods.
30 years generally are enough to distinguish between weather and climate.
The base period chosen is 1961-1990. It is clear an increase in temps occur just recently after 1990. Note, the predictions made by mainstream climatologists before 1990 called it clearly projecting temperature increases.

How reliable are climate models?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models.htm


Of course this trend goes further back to around 1900

There is no target of the ideal, except what the temps were before this documented increase. Any substantial reduction would work as a working target

[hcap]

Observed sea level rise since 1970 from tide gauge data (red) and satellite measurements (blue) compared to model projections for 1990-2010 from the IPCC Third Assessment Report (grey band). (Source: The Copenhagen Diagnosis, 2009)

Here, the models have understated the problem. In reality, observed sea level is tracking at the upper range of the model projections. There are other examples of models being too conservative, rather than alarmist as some portray them. All models have limits - uncertainties - for they are modelling complex systems. However, all models improve over time, and with increasing sources of real-world information such as satellites, the output of climate models can be constantly refined to increase their power and usefulness.

[hcap]

The skepticism by deniers that there was a "pause" in temperatures increasing is wrong and consequently the proof that climate models work is the observed temperature increase recently observed. If models were as faulty as deniers claim temps would not be increasing or sea levels rising

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/0...FckehgodWqoIRQ

Global Warming's Great Hiatus Gets Another Debunking

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

The same thing will happen 75 years from now with global warming or climate change, when none of the predictions of 15 feet sea rises and the extinction of various species of animals occurs.

They've already been proven false. The global warming scare started in 1985 when the hoaxsters claimed that we would be seeing terrifying affects in the next 15 years.

Now let's see. 1985 plus 15. Now what does that add up to. I've never been really good with numbers so I could appreciate some help here.

Its amazing that when leading scientists from all over the world descended on the UN to proclaim that man-made global warming was nonsense, it got one day's worth of coverage.

http://www.climatedepot.com/2010/12/...n-ipcc-gore-2/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestay.../#204fd810171b

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...sus-ian-tuttle

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/e...rmist-religion

http://www.petitionproject.org/