DescentBB

At least that's what the meteorologists have called it. I've noticed that the Climate Change deniers here like to point out those super cold winters that have been running down in the East part of the U.S. as proof that there is no man-caused atmospheric heating, so what about this little development? The RRR currently parked in the North Pacific that's currently giving the East and Mid-West their cold storm headaches, is causing record drought to happen in the West and it's a record breaker.

http://www.montereyherald.com/news/ci_2 ... tists-dont

http://news.yahoo.com/driest-california ... itics.html

And as I sit here in supposedly rainy Oregon in either persistent fog, or sunshine, we've had almost no snow in the mountains, almost zero rain in the valley and only 2 major storms of note, so we're going to be in trouble come summer if this phenomena sticks around for the rest of spring......or longer. Most of 2013 was pretty dry and we're headed for the driest January on record this year. Maybe it's a just the pulse of a natural climate swing, maybe it's not.....

See, the problem here is, it will no longer matter if something is related to climate change or not, for now on………everything unusual will be blamed on it.

Fact of the matter is that weather manipulation is also a factor at this point. Being able to stretch, twist the ionosphere and feed the electromagnetic component of storms is a present day reality. It's another of those monkey wildly pushing buttons (well maybe not wildly) . I get it. It would be too hard to resist.

Some real info on Climate change

Notice it's not called global warming.

flip wrote:Fact of the matter is that weather manipulation is also a factor at this point. Being able to stretch, twist the ionosphere and feed the electromagnetic component of storms is a present day reality. It's another of those monkey wildly pushing buttons (well maybe not wildly) . I get it. It would be too hard to resist.

wut

how?

I've noticed that the Climate Change deniers...

Why would anyone deny that the climate changes? In fact, we're in a relatively stable epoch of nice weather. The planet has had much WILDER changes in the past and they were quite unfriendly compared to todays storm and drought disasters.

For some reason we're all going to die because of the internal combustion engine.

Frankly, we would die in MASSIVE numbers if that engine suddenly didn't exist.

Anyway- when it comes to pollution, maybe the hysterical environmentalists would do the most good going to China and India to create change there because BOTH of these countries produce an insane amount of pollution.

The US is doing great when it comes to pollution reduction AND maintaining the logistical infrastructure to support us all with food and goods AT THE SAME TIME.

Other countries? Not so much.

Oh man, if you guys don't even know about that, I'm not gonna spend my time laying the foundation. Let me find the report, I especially liked the one and I quote "we have to make sure that in our attempts to save the trailer park from the tornado, we don't also cook the people below" this in reference to how much absorption could be expected from raindrops. I think the general public is at least 50 years behind real technology.

EDIT: http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf

This one is pretty good. I'm still looking for the video. There are many different ways to do it. Such as distorting the atmosphere to direct weather systems, or feeding them electromagnetic energy. Which to me seems it would have an intensifying effect unless you can bounce the wave and project exactly where it inverts. Possibilities are endless. Cloud seeding with silver oxide is an old practice, but I don't care for it. They say it's benign but it's photosensitive as hell. We're on the electromagnetic wave now boys, things are gonna get real interesting.

flip wrote:Oh man, if you guys don't even know about that, I'm not gonna spend my time laying the foundation.

oh thank god.

Glad we can find some common ground then

Instead of "Climate Change", the new buzz word being used is "Global Weirding". Even the denialists don't like that term either. Is it that the deniers don't want to accept that MAYBE humans are changing the climate, or that it's just not possible and we should ignore it? What's the deal?

http://www.climatecentral.org/blogs/wac ... al-warming

Global Warming and Climate Change are two separate phenomena. It's not just buzzwords.

All I'm saying is it's a definite factor now. Considering the molecules in a storm are already in an excited state, I'm not sure I'd want to feed more energy into them and excite them anymore. Not where I live anyways! Could very well find a cancelling effect through inversion who knows, but being able to feed large amounts of energy into a storm has to be taken into account now.

I thought you weren't going to try and explain it, flip.

Lol! You crack me up. There was alot of thought and study that went into that simple statement. Here: 1=1

Global Warming, Climate Change and Mad Scientists!

tunnelcat wrote:Instead of "Climate Change", the new buzz word being used is "Global Weirding". Even the denialists don't like that term either. Is it that the deniers don't want to accept that MAYBE humans are changing the climate, or that it's just not possible and we should ignore it? What's the deal?

http://www.climatecentral.org/blogs/wac ... al-warming

Sadly, it's most likely because Al Gore put his name behind it. No other reason to really be against protecting our environment. Your guess is as good as mine.

This was a great find and fun read:

http://www.businessweek.com/stories/200 ... he-weather

I feel for you, TC. I hope it won't be as dry as it sounds like it's going to be. Weather around here has been fairly decent, with only a few hickups here and there effecting crops in the past few years. Spidey nailed it, though--the political side-show that is "Man-Made Climate Change" has so colored the subject for casual observers that it's either going to be proof of "Man-Made Climate Change" or an automatic denial of the same. Someone somewhere should be terribly ashamed at the very least for turning such an important everyday subject into political fodder. Personally I disregard it, with the exception of keeping an eye on the political effects of the movement, and just determine to keep some common sense with regard to environmental issues, and assume that the weather will fluctuate as it always has, and we will need to adjust as we always have. Anyone making an argument about our influence on this earth had better be a million miles from a political platform if they want me to give them any credibility.

We're going to get one little shot of big rain tomorrow, then it's back to dry again. It's gonna be a long, dry summer....... Didn't Indiana get walloped with snow this time ST?

Maybe Climate Change is just a dog and pony show, but even if there is a smidgen of evidence that man may be changing the environment for the worse, why fight it so vociferously? Why not at least TRY to change our carbon polluting ways and improve upon the way we make power, or things, or move ourselves around? We're stuck on this one planet. Talk to most climate deniers and they make it sound like their freedom to make waste from economic progress is being infringed upon.

Climate change, like politics, is all local. People here in the midwest and east are going thru the coldest winter in a hundred years. They won't be thinking global warming now.

woodchip wrote:Climate change, like politics, is all local. People here in the midwest and east are going thru the coldest winter in a hundred years. They won't be thinking global warming now.

well, they won't if they are THAT stupid. The smart ones know better, and understand that extreme weather is a part of the picture.

They're about as stupid as those people who think Algore is worried about Global Warming when all he really is after is the carbon tax credits.

woodchip wrote:Climate change, like politics, is all local. People here in the midwest and east are going thru the coldest winter in a hundred years. They won't be thinking global warming now.

Well, they might get it if they figure out that climate change equals really effed up and extreme weather in the future. By the time we figure it out, we'll be in a heap of merde.

woodchip wrote:People here in the midwest and east are going thru the coldest winter in a hundred years. They won't be thinking global warming now.

EXTREMELY RELEVANT.

I like that we've been telling woodchip for years that a cold winter doesn't disprove climate change, yet he still goes about the same argument. It's cold today so no global warming. [removed -- Jeff]

"denying reality while being surrounded by it"

The problem is, we can't quite prove the reality.....yet. Time will tell, but it'll be too late for us to do anything about it. That's why caution is the better part of valor, even if we don't always agree with it.

tunnelcat wrote:The problem is, we can't quite prove the reality.....yet. Time will tell, but it'll be too late for us to do anything about it. That's why caution is the better part of valor, even if we don't always agree with it.

Bingo!

I hope we learn as much as we can just in case we start looking like bugs

I don't believe we have to wait to know for sure what's going on, myself. I think we just need to disregard the people who have conflicting interests, or have been proven wrong.

Al Gore fails on both counts.

Al Gore has sunken into mediocrity. But make no mistake, climate is like geology. Changes happen very slowly, are not always understood or believed, and are difficult to remedy once they get in motion. The question is: "Have we reached, or passed, the tipping point for a possible man-created climate disaster landslide on this planet"?

I wouldn't worry too much, TC.

Multiple U.S. government bureaucracies including NOAA, NASA, and the Department of Energy are again being accused of inappropriately manipulating temperature data — or “adjusting” it, as officials at the agencies implicated in the scandal put it — to show global warming. While the accusations are not new, the latest scandal, sparked by an in-depth analysis of the data by independent analyst Steven Goddard at Real Science, relies on official records to suggest that federal agencies have been fudging temperature measurements to make past decades seem colder and recent years appear warmer.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/envi ... al-warming

Really now TB, What do they have to gain by lying about it?

I would say there are two questions, rather. 1st) Is the whole notion of Man-Made Climate Change legitimate as presented (man-made, man-made only, ultimately irreversible/linear, catastrophic, ... repairable)? 2nd) Are we going to accept it as a political expedient to allow governments to take steps which our forefathers never would have accepted, to change the face of governance globally and give rise to convenient power shifts and loss of choice or freedom? I think we need to be very careful to understand the full consequences of the ideas lying behind the "solutions" for "climate change", because IMO they are potentially highly disturbing, and we risk repeating some of the ugliness present in darker periods of history just because it's called by a new name. Understanding consequences doesn't seem to be this generation's or humanity's strong point...

ThunderBunny wrote:http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/envi ... al-warming

Critical thinking fail. The article's first citation is from the Real Science blog of Steven Goddard who is not an expert in anything, has never been published, and is likely using a fake name as well. Among other things, his extremely stereotypical right-wing site also contains anti-gun control posts. Here is a classic scare tactic dished out by this esteemed climatologist:

Real Bad Science wrote:In November, 1938 Hitler used a shooting as an excuse to confiscate all of the guns owned by Jews. Immediately after the guns were confiscated, Hitler began rounding up Jews and hauling them off to concentration camps.

Note: This forums overzealous and useless word filter Mr. G's name.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Are we going to accept it as a political expedient to allow governments to take steps which our forefathers never would have accepted, to change the face of governance globally and give rise to convenient power shifts and loss of choice or freedom?

1) Our forefathers could not have predicted the world we live in and the problems we face. They had a nationalistic approach to governance, not a global one. 2) Actions that protect millions or possibly billions of lives need action on the part of all governments collectively, not just ours. Our freedom to poison and pollute got us into this mess to begin with.

Spectacular January Data Tampering By Our Friends At NCDC
Posted on January 29, 2014 by stevengoddard
NCDC turns a strong January cooling trend (orange) into a strong January warming trend (blue) by simply altering the data.



The tampering trend since 1930 is an impressive 2.9 degrees per century. Enron accountants would blush at such blatant fraud.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014 ... s-at-ncdc/

Vision wrote:1) Our forefathers could not have predicted the world we live in and the problems we face. They had a nationalistic approach to governance, not a global one. 2) Actions that protect millions or possibly billions of lives need action on the part of all governments collectively, not just ours. Our freedom to poison and pollute got us into this mess to begin with.

The prosecution of the destruction of environmental resources, or pieces of the environment, does not truly demand a restructure of nationalistic, republic government. Any one of our freedoms could be blamed for any mess which is allowed to happen, but only a fool would accept he concept of freedom itself as being at fault.

I respectfully request one to look at the environmental damage totalitarian states have done.

It's not any particular government system that does the damage, it's the humans.

ThunderBunny wrote:...

Anyone with Microsoft Office can make an Excel graph and post it on the Internet. You need to work on discernment.