It really isn't that cold in Canada where all the people live. The largest state in the U.S., much of Russia, Antarctica, Finland, etc. are all pretty much colder on a continual basis with more people than Canada. I think people think it's so cold here because we use metric (as opposed to the Americans) and that we complain so much more about it... (possibly from a strong UK cultural heritage?)
Why do you post as AC, surely someone with such strong views about the "pro Global Warming Climate Change Agena", masturbation, the human race and Buzz Lighttard would like to attract followers?
The beetles have never been killed due to low temperatures since the last iceage
Which is why the species still exists...?
Also notice that the ranges of the trees they inhabit are predomimately more northern where they are denser, where the problem is much more widespread (BC, AB, WA, OR). Trees like Ponderosa species live in little islands (where they extend southward to Mexico).
The range isn't growing southward, but northward (i.e. towards the Canadian boreal forest, which is very dense, mostly pine and would be a huge problem), where it used to be colder, longer - on average.
(And as we've both seemingly agreed on, there are other factors which I mention previously).
Good points on the psychological implications of the word science.
I'd like to make a point on another word, "skepticism". Healthy skepticism is good, encourages critical thinking. Unbridled skepticism bordering on conspiracy of everything around you leads to paranoia and delusion, not scientific knowledge.
Somehow, like most things in life, the truth is in the middle.:)
How many pro-AGW people have you heard on ; radio, TV, internet forums, blogs, magazines, journals, mail correspondence, e-mail,... Twitter?,...
advocate genocide as a viable solution? There are some environmentalists who advocate having a shrinking population would be a good thing (say gradual reduction through natural means down to 1 billion, or 3 or 5 or whatever), but how many actually say; grab your rifle and shoot your neighbour. Drink some locally grown organic yam juice to celebrate?
Compare; how many people who aren't pro-AGW, or deniers, or anti-AGW, or contrarians, or libertarians, or free-thinkers (or whatever group you/they/whoever wishes to associate with; rather than get into a semantic war) attribute this "solution" to the first group?
Obviously installing scrubbers in a coal plant, or changing legislation for car emissions, or putting up a wind farm, or researching battery technologies, upgrading electrical infrastructure, rebates for locally grown food/greenhouses, green-houses, reducing water use, recycling e-waste properly, reclaiming tailing ponds, etc. will destroy the economy.
Nothing can be done! The only obvious solution is to OBLITERATE EVERYTHING!
I realize you see everyone else around you as an extremist. However, as others have eloquently pointed out, why not start somewhere and work to improve. Like middle ground, like every argument everywhere at any time. How many things that are complex are simply yes/no?
You have real science. Read the IPCC report. They are using a very long bit of history with proxy data.
Also, if you're going to repeat tired phrases like "worship at the altar of the religion of climate change", at least get it right.
As I've said elsewhere, why do you think the Hadean Eon (or even much of the Precambian) matters to current climate? Most geologists estimate the temperature was 230 C. Which, you must love saying, was the hottest year on record:P
Further; electric cars are a great start, but not enough to eliminate foreign oil dependency. The Americans will then also need electric tanks, electric planes, electric oil and gas and coal plants, and electric petrochemicals, plastics. I'm sure that oil has other uses.
Because if it's shrinking, they mean year after year. As in, you get 1000 m^3 of water the first year when summer comes around and there's melt. The next year, 800 m^3, etc.
Glad you asked the question and weren't misled by interpreting the language incorrectly.
While it is a factor, it isn't the sole cause. The Canadian Government issued a ton of grants and a lot of material was published. From people I knew that worked directly on those papers, they said the general problem was global warming and warmer winters coupled with other factors as you have mentioned (forests of the same age, lack of fires, etc.).
"...ponderosa, lodgepole, Scotch and limber pine trees"
I live near some of these areas. Driving through the mountains doesn't look like some trees are dead. It looks like a forest fire (from wiki; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yoho_National_Park_of_Canada.jpg, and some places look much worse), or they're all red (under extreme stress and will die soon).
Everyone says that being more green or what have you would utterly destroy the world economy, sending us into a terrible depression, sky afire, cats and dogs getting along; have you seen any numbers... you know, anywhere, from any side?
The most reasonable I've heard is 1% of global wealth spent on environmental activities (mostly shouldered by wealth countries, so (0.01 / 0.90) * national GDP for wealthy countries). I'm no economist, but if 1% of the world's wealth suddenly vanished, would the economy spiral downward and destroy modern civilization?
Example. Compare the U.S. Iraq War (Operation Enduring Freedom), estimated at $1.9 trillion (admittedly, over several years), compared to the current estimate of world GDP, ~$58 trillion.
Trademarks also help the company establish trust and brand recognition. Consumers don't file for trademarks, but they get the benefit of knowing who they're dealing with. It works both ways.
Exercise:
Let's compare the tone of his ENTIRE post to yours:
No, about $250. I consider it an investment to get a good processor, but I am a gamer, and I heavily overclock. (i7 930 @ 4.2 right now). It's really a matter of how much money you're willing to spend on that performance. Since I compile applications (on Windows; I program), play video games, and do video encoding, I see big benefits in paying a few bucks more and getting better performance.
Let's choose a random sample
Both AMD and Intel now have automatic overclocking features that are, let's face it, smarter than any 13 year old tweaking their shit in BIOS and posting about it on the internet (i.e., you). Any overclocking results listed by any review sites are a joke. Unless the site bought the CPU at retail, anonymously, it's a cherry picked sample.
Who's the person who's ranting immaturely on the Internet? Do you need to rationalize your consumer choices that strongly?
Why are you buying an album or Star Wars disc set over and over? OCD? Example:
You never bought the CD version or the Digital Deluxe version when it was released on vinyl. You bought the vinyl version.
Do you think that Apple (the other Apple, confusing I know) should track down all people who bought original albums and give them digital downloads? Run a server and just offer old music for free using the CD key hidden inside the vinyl case in case of this eventuality?
If they spend the time to reformat it or whatever, why should they just give it to you because you've been a customer before?
I don't think it's worth it to upgrade my whole DVD collection to BluRay and pay all over again, but I'm not going to go and download all the BluRays. Even if I do, I don't feel as though I'm entitled to - at least I'll admit I'm stealing it. I have the DVDs, and they haven't been taken from me.
It's all a conspiracy, haven't you heard of Apple-Android-gate? They're trying to "hide their decline" as some e-mails were wikileaked awhile back. I think I read it on Cnet.
Slashdot Mirror
It really isn't that cold in Canada where all the people live. The largest state in the U.S., much of Russia, Antarctica, Finland, etc. are all pretty much colder on a continual basis with more people than Canada. I think people think it's so cold here because we use metric (as opposed to the Americans) and that we complain so much more about it... (possibly from a strong UK cultural heritage?)
Why do you post as AC, surely someone with such strong views about the "pro Global Warming Climate Change Agena", masturbation, the human race and Buzz Lighttard would like to attract followers?
The beetles have never been killed due to low temperatures since the last iceage
Which is why the species still exists...?
Also notice that the ranges of the trees they inhabit are predomimately more northern where they are denser, where the problem is much more widespread (BC, AB, WA, OR). Trees like Ponderosa species live in little islands (where they extend southward to Mexico).
The range isn't growing southward, but northward (i.e. towards the Canadian boreal forest, which is very dense, mostly pine and would be a huge problem), where it used to be colder, longer - on average.
(And as we've both seemingly agreed on, there are other factors which I mention previously).
Good points on the psychological implications of the word science.
:)
I'd like to make a point on another word, "skepticism". Healthy skepticism is good, encourages critical thinking. Unbridled skepticism bordering on conspiracy of everything around you leads to paranoia and delusion, not scientific knowledge.
Somehow, like most things in life, the truth is in the middle.
How many pro-AGW people have you heard on ; radio, TV, internet forums, blogs, magazines, journals, mail correspondence, e-mail, ... Twitter?, ...
advocate genocide as a viable solution? There are some environmentalists who advocate having a shrinking population would be a good thing (say gradual reduction through natural means down to 1 billion, or 3 or 5 or whatever), but how many actually say; grab your rifle and shoot your neighbour. Drink some locally grown organic yam juice to celebrate?
Compare; how many people who aren't pro-AGW, or deniers, or anti-AGW, or contrarians, or libertarians, or free-thinkers (or whatever group you/they/whoever wishes to associate with; rather than get into a semantic war) attribute this "solution" to the first group?
Obviously installing scrubbers in a coal plant, or changing legislation for car emissions, or putting up a wind farm, or researching battery technologies, upgrading electrical infrastructure, rebates for locally grown food/greenhouses, green-houses, reducing water use, recycling e-waste properly, reclaiming tailing ponds, etc. will destroy the economy.
Nothing can be done! The only obvious solution is to OBLITERATE EVERYTHING!
I realize you see everyone else around you as an extremist. However, as others have eloquently pointed out, why not start somewhere and work to improve. Like middle ground, like every argument everywhere at any time. How many things that are complex are simply yes/no?
You have real science. Read the IPCC report. They are using a very long bit of history with proxy data.
:P
Also, if you're going to repeat tired phrases like "worship at the altar of the religion of climate change", at least get it right.
As I've said elsewhere, why do you think the Hadean Eon (or even much of the Precambian) matters to current climate? Most geologists estimate the temperature was 230 C. Which, you must love saying, was the hottest year on record
(d'accord)
(Stereotyping): But wait, are there electric armour-plated Escalades with gun racks?
Further; electric cars are a great start, but not enough to eliminate foreign oil dependency. The Americans will then also need electric tanks, electric planes, electric oil and gas and coal plants, and electric petrochemicals, plastics. I'm sure that oil has other uses.
Because if it's shrinking, they mean year after year. As in, you get 1000 m^3 of water the first year when summer comes around and there's melt. The next year, 800 m^3, etc.
Glad you asked the question and weren't misled by interpreting the language incorrectly.
While it is a factor, it isn't the sole cause. The Canadian Government issued a ton of grants and a lot of material was published. From people I knew that worked directly on those papers, they said the general problem was global warming and warmer winters coupled with other factors as you have mentioned (forests of the same age, lack of fires, etc.).
Here is a list of the publications:
http://mpb.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/archive/projects/completed_e.html
"...ponderosa, lodgepole, Scotch and limber pine trees"
I live near some of these areas. Driving through the mountains doesn't look like some trees are dead. It looks like a forest fire (from wiki; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yoho_National_Park_of_Canada.jpg, and some places look much worse), or they're all red (under extreme stress and will die soon).
Lying liars are the worst kind :P
You missed something in your last sentence.
The warmest year was obviously during the Hadean Eon. However, it is also obviously not relevant. At all.
Planetary Action 8: Centripetal Motion
(All celestial bodies depicted are over 4.5 billion years of age)
Everyone says that being more green or what have you would utterly destroy the world economy, sending us into a terrible depression, sky afire, cats and dogs getting along; have you seen any numbers... you know, anywhere, from any side?
The most reasonable I've heard is 1% of global wealth spent on environmental activities (mostly shouldered by wealth countries, so (0.01 / 0.90) * national GDP for wealthy countries). I'm no economist, but if 1% of the world's wealth suddenly vanished, would the economy spiral downward and destroy modern civilization?
Example. Compare the U.S. Iraq War (Operation Enduring Freedom), estimated at $1.9 trillion (admittedly, over several years), compared to the current estimate of world GDP, ~$58 trillion.
Hippie eukaryote lover! We should never believe you!
Trademarks also help the company establish trust and brand recognition. Consumers don't file for trademarks, but they get the benefit of knowing who they're dealing with. It works both ways.
(I posted this previously before I logged in)
Correction; Kleenex isn't a genericized trademark, but its close. Still illustrates what I was going for though, as other commenters have pointed out.
I see, a limited number of plays idea. I agree that that seems more morally shady.
Let's compare the tone of his ENTIRE post to yours:
No, about $250. I consider it an investment to get a good processor, but I am a gamer, and I heavily overclock. (i7 930 @ 4.2 right now). It's really a matter of how much money you're willing to spend on that performance. Since I compile applications (on Windows; I program), play video games, and do video encoding, I see big benefits in paying a few bucks more and getting better performance.
Let's choose a random sample
Both AMD and Intel now have automatic overclocking features that are, let's face it, smarter than any 13 year old tweaking their shit in BIOS and posting about it on the internet (i.e., you). Any overclocking results listed by any review sites are a joke. Unless the site bought the CPU at retail, anonymously, it's a cherry picked sample.
Who's the person who's ranting immaturely on the Internet? Do you need to rationalize your consumer choices that strongly?
But you won't stop. You're compulsive.
Why are you buying an album or Star Wars disc set over and over? OCD? Example:
You never bought the CD version or the Digital Deluxe version when it was released on vinyl. You bought the vinyl version.
Do you think that Apple (the other Apple, confusing I know) should track down all people who bought original albums and give them digital downloads? Run a server and just offer old music for free using the CD key hidden inside the vinyl case in case of this eventuality?
If they spend the time to reformat it or whatever, why should they just give it to you because you've been a customer before?
I don't think it's worth it to upgrade my whole DVD collection to BluRay and pay all over again, but I'm not going to go and download all the BluRays. Even if I do, I don't feel as though I'm entitled to - at least I'll admit I'm stealing it. I have the DVDs, and they haven't been taken from me.
Pretty much the only original post in this discussion. Congratulations :)
It's all a conspiracy, haven't you heard of Apple-Android-gate? They're trying to "hide their decline" as some e-mails were wikileaked awhile back. I think I read it on Cnet.