Page 26 of 111 FirstFirst ... 1621222324252627282930313676 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 520 of 2209
  1. #501  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    Actually, I live in two; New Canaan is not bad either.

    Fort Ord is "closed." As with many of the bases that have been BRACed, it is being very successfully redeveloped. There is a political move for "low-cost" housing but there can be no such thing in an area where values are increasing at 30% a year.
    Yes the cost of living is ridiculous all over the area.
  2. #502  
    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskanDad
    Your EFMB was some tough stuff. I dip my EIB hat to you.
    Speaking of, Cell...where's the badge??
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  3. #503  
    I guess you can relate on this one, sometimes you just get the idea in your head to change your avatar. So I am looking for something new right now.
  4. #504  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Here's another example from India, a bit earlier this year. The the highest recorded rainfall in India, hundreds killed.

    A changing climate is bad for most if not all, because we (e.g. our agricultural systems) are adapted to the present conditions, changes mean problems, sometimes massive problems, specially for those who can barely survive presently.

    What can you do? First, you could start accepting the idea that there MAY be a problem. All but one Western country have signed the Kyoto protocol, only the worst polluter refrained from that simple step which doesn't even have far-reaching consequences (guess who). Then you can start working on solutions. Why not start developing new types of cars which don't waste that much energy (90 % of the energy in a combustion engine is wasted as heat)? Why not start projects in that field instead trying to fly to Mars?

    Think of it, you would not be so desperately dependent on oil from the Middle East or from Venezuela. Maybe your president would not even have to walk hand-in-hand with a Saudi prince on his ranch any more.
    kind of ironic that India is one of the countries that does not want pollution limits imposed, don't you think? While USA may be the worst, China and India are catching up fast. So the question is - how do you incentivize them to reduce pollution?

    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskanDad
    FACTS
    1. The world is getting warmer
    2. Humans are responsible
    3. There is nothing we can do right now (even if every breathing human participated) to show ANY effect within the next 50 years
    4. Any efforts would only show their effects after 50 years

    Big question (for discussion purposes only, doesn't reflect my own views):
    So what?

    Why should we care and why should we bother doing anything about it?
    1 and 2 are not debatable points (even though our beloved anti-science administration loves to distort everything)

    3 and 4 are not "facts" either - but a good starting point would be to reduce pollution levels among the worst offenders. Even if we cannot reverse the trend - at least we could slow it down or even have it level off.

    As for the So what question - the answer is intelligent self-preservation, the key word being "intelligent".
    You could ask the same question about almost anything that does not affect us directly today - so what if we did not preserve our natural wildlife resources? so what if we polluted every river and lake in North America? so what if we let all our autos and industrial smokestacks spew out anything without any controls? so what if we cut down all our forests across the land so that we could use the wood for fuel?
    If our forefathers (and our parents generation) had the same attitude we would all be stewing in our own garbage and living in a wasteland.
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  5. #505  
    I think it reeks of humanism to believe that we could have such profound control and influence over this 4.5 billion-year-old rock that we've only resided upon for a couple hundred thousand years.

    But oh yes, everything is about us!
    Last edited by diomedes; 08/31/2005 at 10:58 PM.
  6. #506  
    Quote Originally Posted by diomedes
    I think reeks of humanism to believe that we could have such profound control and influence over this 4.5 billion-year-old rock that we've only resided upon for a couple hundred thousand years.

    But oh yes, everything is about us!
    Touche'!
  7. #507  
    Quote Originally Posted by chillig35
    kind of ironic that India is one of the countries that does not want pollution limits imposed, don't you think? While USA may be the worst, China and India are catching up fast. So the question is - how do you incentivize them to reduce pollution?

    1 and 2 are not debatable points (even though our beloved anti-science administration loves to distort everything)

    3 and 4 are not "facts" either - but a good starting point would be to reduce pollution levels among the worst offenders. Even if we cannot reverse the trend - at least we could slow it down or even have it level off.

    As for the So what question - the answer is intelligent self-preservation, the key word being "intelligent".
    You could ask the same question about almost anything that does not affect us directly today - so what if we did not preserve our natural wildlife resources? so what if we polluted every river and lake in North America? so what if we let all our autos and industrial smokestacks spew out anything without any controls? so what if we cut down all our forests across the land so that we could use the wood for fuel?
    If our forefathers (and our parents generation) had the same attitude we would all be stewing in our own garbage and living in a wasteland.
    One should not foul one's own nest.
  8.    #508  
    Environmental Group to Sue US Govt

    I'm crazy for Cocoa Puffs!
  9. #509  
    "Harlan L. Watson, the U.S. envoy for negotiations on climate change, denied any link between global warming and the strength of storms.
    "Our scientists are telling us right now that there's not a linkage," he said in Geneva. "I'll rely on their information."

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050831/...rina_world_hk4 (Thanks to jmill72x for the link)

    "Hurricanes have grown significantly more powerful and destructive over the last three decades due in part to global warming, says an MIT professor who warns that this trend could continue.
    "My results suggest that future warming may lead to an upward trend in [hurricanes'] destructive potential, and--taking into account an increasing coastal population--a substantial increase in hurricane-related losses in the 21st century," reports Kerry Emanuel in a paper appearing in the July 31 online edition of the journal Nature."
    http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2005/hurricanes.html
    (Nature is the most prestigious scientific publication, the MIT is one of the most prestigious research institute of the world).
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  10.    #510  
    Two sources indicate hurricanes are in cycles, not the blame of humans.

    The first is from New York Times August 30

    Another article from the same climatologist.

    "Because hurricanes form over warm ocean water, it is easy to assume that the recent rise in their number and ferocity is because of global warming. But that is not the case, scientists say. Instead, the severity of hurricane seasons changes with cycles of temperatures of several decades in the Atlantic Ocean. The recent onslaught 'is very much natural,' said William M. Gray, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University who issues forecasts for the hurricane season."

    source

    Giant hurricanes are rare, but they are not new. And they are not increasing. To the contrary. Just go to the website of the National Hurricane Center and check out a table that lists hurricanes by category and decade. The peak for major hurricanes (categories 3,4,5) came in the decades of the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s, when such storms averaged 9 per decade. In the 1960s, there were 6 such storms; in the 1970s, 4; in the 1980s, 5; in the 1990s, 5; and for 2001-04, there were 3. Category 4 and 5 storms were also more prevalent in the past than they are now. As for Category 5 storms, there have been only three since the 1850s: in the decades of the 1930s, 1960s and 1990s.
  11. #511  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Two sources indicate hurricanes are in cycles, not the blame of humans.

    The first is from New York Times August 30

    Another article from the same climatologist.

    "Because hurricanes form over warm ocean water, it is easy to assume that the recent rise in their number and ferocity is because of global warming. But that is not the case, scientists say. Instead, the severity of hurricane seasons changes with cycles of temperatures of several decades in the Atlantic Ocean. The recent onslaught 'is very much natural,' said William M. Gray, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University who issues forecasts for the hurricane season."

    source

    Giant hurricanes are rare, but they are not new. And they are not increasing. To the contrary. Just go to the website of the National Hurricane Center and check out a table that lists hurricanes by category and decade. The peak for major hurricanes (categories 3,4,5) came in the decades of the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s, when such storms averaged 9 per decade. In the 1960s, there were 6 such storms; in the 1970s, 4; in the 1980s, 5; in the 1990s, 5; and for 2001-04, there were 3. Category 4 and 5 storms were also more prevalent in the past than they are now. As for Category 5 storms, there have been only three since the 1850s: in the decades of the 1930s, 1960s and 1990s.
    Agreed - it is unlikely that cyclical weather patterns such as cyclones can be linked to global warming. What would be more indicative would be more sustained global trends like we saw with El Nino several years ago, or disruption of the ocean conveyor belts. It is possible that we may see a correlation between global storms (including winters storms) and global warming in later part of this century - it is still to early to tell as we do not yet have the data & tools to make these correlations.
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  12. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #512  
    Just some more to read:

    Alarm over dramatic weakening of Gulf Stream

    Source: Guardian UK

    The powerful ocean current that bathes Britain and northern Europe in warm waters from the tropics has weakened dramatically in recent years, a consequence of global warming that could trigger more severe winters and cooler summers across the region, scientists warn today.
    Researchers on a scientific expedition in the Atlantic Ocean measured the strength of the current between Africa and the east coast of America and found that the circulation has slowed by 30% since a previous expedition 12 years ago.

    The current, which drives the Gulf Stream, delivers the equivalent of 1m power stations-worth of energy to northern Europe, propping up temperatures by 10C in some regions. The researchers found that the circulation has weakened by 6m tonnes of water a second. Previous expeditions to check the current flow in 1957, 1981 and 1992 found only minor changes in its strength, although a slowing was picked up in a further expedition in 1998. The decline prompted the scientists to set up a £4.8m network of moored instruments in the Atlantic to monitor changes in the current continuously.

    The network should also answer the pressing question of whether the significant weakening of the current is a short-term variation, or part of a more devastating long-term slowing of the flow.

    If the current remains as weak as it is, temperatures in Britain are likely to drop by an average of 1C in the next decade, according to Harry Bryden at the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton who led the study. "Models show that if it shuts down completely, 20 years later, the temperature is 4C to 6C degrees cooler over the UK and north-western Europe," Dr Bryden said.


    -snip-
  13. #513  
    Here's my own personal experience. In the San Francisco area, there was an abnormal heat wave in the middle of November last month with temperatures in the 70s. Usually "Indian Summer" heat wave occurs in September instead.

    During the week of unusually warm weather in November, I actually had bad allergies for the first time ever in November. Usually, I always get allergies in March/April every year for the past 12+ years. But my nose actually thought November was spring time. This was absolutely nutty for me to be sneezy with allergies in November last month. I was popping antihistimine pills to no avail.

    So what does this tell me personally? The weather must be changing. My nose and sinus never lie! Must be some truth to all this global warming stuff. Maybe we should start building a Noah's ark for when all the glaciers melt.
  14.    #514  
    And speaking of the Kyoto Treaty, in 2006, France, Germany, Italy and Spain will fail by a wide margin to fulfill their Kyoto targets, just as they have failed so far, according to a study released this week by the London Institute for Public Policy Research.

    These same countries, moreover, will continue to rail against the United States for not signing the treaty that the EU countries have signed and failed to enforce. This is not to side with the United States on this matter, but to raise the question: Is it better not to sign a treaty you know you can't fulfill, or to sign it and then fail to take the steps that signing it requires?

    link

    Perfectly said.

    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    All but one Western country have signed the Kyoto protocol, only the worst polluter refrained from that simple step which doesn't even have far-reaching consequences (guess who)
  15. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #515  
    Travellers face chaos as freeze hits Europe

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/weather/St...html?gusrc=rss

    What does this type weather say about global warming?
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  16. #516  
    Michael Crichton makes a lot of sense on the pseudo-scientific issue of "climate change" and our role in it (as well as other related fear-mongering).

    http://www.michaelcrichton.com/speec...omplexity.html
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  17.    #517  
    It means the Euros pollute a lot.

    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Travellers face chaos as freeze hits Europe

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/weather/St...html?gusrc=rss

    What does this type weather say about global warming?
  18. #518  
    Experts: Global warming behind 2005 hurricanes

    Tuesday, April 25, 2006; Posted: 8:32 p.m. EDT (00:32 GMT)

    MONTEREY, California (Reuters) -- The record Atlantic hurricane season last year can be attributed to global warming, several top experts, including a leading U.S. government storm researcher, said on Monday.

    "The hurricanes we are seeing are indeed a direct result of climate change and it's no longer something we'll see in the future, it's happening now," said Greg Holland, a division director at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

    Holland told a packed hall at the American Meteorological Society's 27th Conference on Hurricanes and Tropical Meteorology that the wind and warmer water conditions that fuel storms that form in the Caribbean are "increasingly due to greenhouse gases. There seems to be no other conclusion you can logically draw."
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  19. #519  
    The next paragraph:
    "His conclusion will be debated throughout the week-long conference, as other researchers present opposing papers that say changing wind and temperature conditions in the tropics are due to natural events, not the accumulation of carbon dioxide emissions clouding the Earth."

    Apparently other "experts" believe you can draw a different logical conclusion.
  20. #520  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim
    Apparently other "experts" believe you can draw a different logical conclusion.
    Of course there are always other experts who say different things, but in the case above, they are a species at the brink of extinction. It is usually a good idea to listen to the broad majority of the people competent in a certain field.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)

Posting Permissions