Page 61 of 111 FirstFirst ... 1151565758596061626364656671 ... LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,220 of 2209
  1. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1201  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    But Glenn Beck says this is all fake?
    Didn't Jeff Gannon say the same?
  2. #1202  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    Hobbes I think it is a fallacy to think that human activities are the only factor in determining whether our world temp rises. but they are the only factor we have control over. And I for one choose to believe the recommendations of the vast majority of climate scientists based on the available data.
    Cell...I wasn't trying to make a point. I was only interested if these two factors have been linked in any way....or possibly could be....in any reading you have done.

    Our own actions as acts towards prevention is not the only factor we have control over. We also have control on any preparation we may need to take to prepare for any events that may be coming even if it was 100% caused by nature (which I don't believe this is). So understanding ALL aspects is important and very worthy to ask if others have looked at as well. To not do so I feel is to willfully ignore all aspects that maybe effecting the situation. To do so is not an attack or avoidance of responsibility of our own impact on our own environment. To do so is not to go at odds with the "vast majority of climate scientists", but to productively question them and the findings with eye not to debunk their findings but to expand our understanding....which I thought you thought was always a productive step in the scientific process. Because I am guessing that if this was the reality of the situation it would accelerate the process of melting the ice caps and glaciers around the world faster than just the effects of humans alone. Understanding the cause and effect no matter the source or from all sources is invaluable to our understanding of our environment, take any steps in prevention if possible, and to take any steps in preparation of any future events whether preventable or inevitable.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 05/02/2007 at 03:34 PM.
  3. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1203  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    So understanding ALL aspects is important and very worthy to ask if others have looked at as well. To not do so I feel is to willfully ignore all aspects that maybe effecting the situation. To do so is not an attack or avoidance of responsibility of our own impact on our own environment. To do so is not to go at odds with the "vast majority of climate scientists", but to productively question them and the findings with eye not to debunk their findings but to expand our understanding.
    Yet your own posturing (but not yours alone ) in presenting tangential evidence against climate change (or man's involvement in it) stands in stark contrast to the gee-golly position you now express. Beyond this, and to address the fundamentals, is that unless you've made this science your professional life's work, anecdotal and unqualified remarks from us, in total, the peanut gallery of this planet, don't amount to a hill of dust.

    There is an admitted political argument just beneath the surface of this issue that most are unwilling to directly confront, and most who do wrap their argument in willful ignorance. When 28% of the American people believe that George W. Bush is 'doin' a fine job' and 25% of the American people believe that Jesus is coming back this year, it offers a crystalized glimpse into what is ultimately at the base of the NeoCon religion which also frames this issue.
  4. #1204  
    Wow!!!!!!! Hmm....let's see...I recognize that humans have a major negative impact on our environment. Check.

    I have been trying to get a discussion of solutions to curb and eventually eliminate that threat with a laundry list of ideas and encouraged others to add or expound on it. Check.

    I was trying to understand what may actually accelerate this process to see what steps of preparation and within what time frame we might need to look at starting now with dealing with the effects of Global Warming. Check

    I ask if a natural phenomenon reported in this very forum could increase that risk of the melting ice caps and glaciers and the dangers we may soon face as a result of this tragic event that is apparently taking place at this very moment, and I am posturing with a gee-golly political biased lead by the nose Bush inspired position because I believe Jesus is coming this year as a member of the NeoCon religion?

    I think you might of missed the whole point.....or you were trying to twist my honest inquiries into the possible realities of this serious subject to make a point of your own. Or maybe your bias is showing.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 05/02/2007 at 09:56 PM. Reason: After reading previous response again.....just had to add the WOW to the begining.
  5. #1205  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Hmm....let's see...I recognize that humans have a major negative impact on our environment. Check.

    I have been trying to get a discussion of solutions to curb and eventually eliminate that threat with a laundry list of ideas and encouraged others to add or expound on it. Check.

    I was trying to understand what may actually excelerate this process to see what step of preparation we might need to look at starting now with dealing with the effects of Global Warming. Check

    I ask if a natural phenomenon reported in this very forum could increase that risk of the melting ice caps and glaciers and the dangers we may soon face as a result of this tragic event that is apparently taking place at this very moment, and I am posturing with a gee-golly political biased lead by the nose Bush inspired position because I believe Jesus is coming this year as a member of the NeoCon religion?

    I think you might of missed the whole point.....or you were trying to twist my honest inquiries into the possible realities of this serious subject to make a point of your own.
    Hobbes, can you find a peer reviewed journal article which explains how this phenomenon impacts human made global warming? I can't, unfortunately.
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 05/02/2007 at 06:10 PM.
  6. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1206  
    Hobbes - If you seriously still have the questions you outlined, you haven't been paying attention, with all due respect.
  7. #1207  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    Hobbes, can you find a peer reviewed journal article on the natural phenomenon you are talking about which explains how it impacts human made global warming? All I have is the news article.
    I will dig it up. It was pretty interesting. I am going off of memory but it was talking about the snowball effect that may have been a cause of rapid climate in the past and the fear that man made changes could trigger the same type of unstoppable natural snowball effect now where greenhouse gasses of the past been trapped in ice layers in glaciers and the ice caps. Any event, be it man or massive volcanic activity, etc... starts the melting of the ice. The gases trapped there, apparently in massive amounts, are released. Causing more greenhouse effect. Cause more ice to melt. Releasing more trapped greenhouse gases, etc...

    Who knows maybe I read one night at 2 am in the morning and I got it all backwards....I want to read it again. I am wrapping up work, but I will post it when I find it.
  8. #1208  
    Hobbes, meet backbeat. Betcha didn't know someone knows you better than you know yourself!
  9. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1209  
    Forgive me for having committed the mortal sin of having paid attention.

    In the pursuit of solutions that you'll give the Official NeoCon Seal of Approval to, you're on your own.
  10. #1210  
    Cell...I am still looking as I am sure I saw it posted and linked at TC....maybe it was in another Global Warming related thread. But when reviewing this thread I do remember this documentary touching on a similar principle when talking about the recent discoveries of rapid climate changes they have just found. I remember them talking about some glaciers and ice fields Russia I believe when talking about this phenomenon. I will keep on looking because I want to read it again too.
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Naked Science had a new episode that was made just a little while ago this year about Global warming. They divided the show basically into two topics.......Earth's natural history of climate change......and man's effect on climate change. I think one cannot be looked at with ignoring the other.

    They showed that very recent studies covering the last 300,000 years have shown VERY rapid swings in climate have occurred and more rapidly and more often than ever previously thought. They showed ice core studies that indicated 2 decades to initiate a climate change for a local and/or massive ice age. There were also very long and gradual swings in and out of such dramatic climate changes. They said that the latest research is starting to show that the last 10,000 years of constant "boring climate changes" is not the norm for the earths history, but the exception.

    They also went on to show the research in the effect that man is having on the environment and that now, we maybe the major source for initiating climate change instead of mother nature. They never answered the question posed if this was more of man helping mother nature speed along what would have happened anyways or changing the course of the historical swings that they have been discovering.

    Everything above is simply relaying what the show presented. My personal opininion.....and I have already admitted several times in this thread that I am not an expert....is that nature does have drastic climate swings historically. Some fast and some slow. I also strongly believe that we have a direct impact on our climate and the course it may be taking.
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    This is pretty much exactly what the research was saying that Naked Science was referring to that I mentioned above. They were focusing on the last 200,000 years of climate changes and stating that the last 10,000 years of climate stability is the fluke rather than the norm.

    They also posed the question where this "boring period of climate changes" was naturally coming to an end or were we bringing it to and end and back to the often time swiftly changes that the world has seen in the past.

    I found it fascinating....and a little scary....with some of the recent discoveries showing the possibilities that massive and more localized Ice Ages were brought on by nature herself within 20 years. Though they pointed out that majority of the climate changes do tend hundreds or thousands of years.
  11. #1211  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man View Post
    Shocking evidence that climate change has been going on, well forever...
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0428170229.htm
    climate change does goes on forever -thats pretty hard to dispute.
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man View Post
    We will see in our lifetime the greatest waste of taxpayer's money and big American businesses fork out money to try to shift nature's warming.
    The IPCC panel of international climate experts disagrees.
    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...d/4775416.html
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man View Post
    We will then see American business lose to foreign businesses (i.e. Chinese, India) that won't partake in the foolishness.
    If China wants to continue destroy their own resources, through deforestation, water and air pollution in an effort to burn as much coal and oil as they can to "outdo" us, they will learn the hard way how misguided that idea is. They already are, actually.
    http://www.csis.msu.edu/Publication%...balization.pdf
    (warning pdf)
  12. #1212  
    This has nothing with current conditions, but thought that those in this thread would appreciate in anyways:

    Snowball fight erupts over frozen Earth theory
    Scientists theorize over how our planet resisted becoming covered in ice
    The theory that the Earth long ago froze completely over, like a giant snowball, is challenged by new data from desert outcroppings in Oman. The geological measurements indicate that even as glaciers spread across all the continents 700 million years ago, warm spells with liquid water were still common.

    The question now is how did our planet resist becoming a popsicle.

    FULL STORY: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18535636/
  13. #1213  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    I have to say, that it still amazes me that with the potential of the world's wealth as a prize, that we do not have more advancement in alternative fuel sources for cars and other modes of transportation. I enjoy reading about the advancements of electronic cars, fuel cells, to nuclear powered batteries, etc... It seems that with all the technology we have now and all the new technologies we are developing and discovering all the time that there isn't a solution yet. It seems that no matter what alternative source you look at, it is "almost there"....but that for one challenge or another they are not able to mass market it, just cannot get that extra umph of power to make it have that mass appeal, just have to make it last a little longer to make it meet every day needs, etc...

    It reminds of what someone just posted today or yesterday....remember the movie Money Pit where the contractor keeps on telling Tom Hanks for months he will be finished in two weeks.

    -----------

    IMMEDIATE NEEDS/GOALS (1-9 years)
    • Offer federal assistance to American auto makers to develop and implement current options (like more electrical power vs fossil fuel).
    • Increased Tax savings to individuals individuals who buy these cars.


    LONG TERM NEEDS/GOALS (10-25 years)
    • Develop a car that does not run on fossil fuel at all. This would be such a HUGE financial incentive that the private sector should be easy to involve.
    • Add tax breaks for companies actively pursuing this goal with reviews of progress to continue these breaks.
    • Federal funding for University research into alternatives.
    • Implement a distribution system to support the new alternative fuel if needed that will need to replace gas stations.
    • Have a $100 million X prize for the first person or org to present a mass market solution for non fossil fuel car.

    Here is an ABC article that talks about what is happening with cars right now....as I said in the post above....it is still "almost there":

    The Race for a Clean Car

    Ten years ago I interviewed an engaging young engineer named Chris Borroni-Bird, then at Chrysler, whose area of expertise was fuel cells. He said to me, “There’s every reason to expect that this technology could be affordable and competitive with today’s internal combustion engine in ten years’ time.”

    Ten years have gone by, and while hydrogen cars still seem a long way off, car companies are tripping over each other trying to show them off. Borroni-Bird is now at GM, which is showing off a prototype fuel-cell car called the Chevy Sequel.

    ---------------

    Honda, meanwhile, has announced it will maket a limited number of its FCX fuel cell cars, and have a select audience driving them on regular roads. The company says, with a straight face, that the car gets the equivalent of 68 miles per gallon.

    Toyota is in the game too; they've put out word that by 2020, every car they make will be a hybrid (except, presumably, for fuel cell cars).

    Full story with additional links: http://blogs.abcnews.com/scienceands...ce_for_a_.html
  14. #1214  
    Global warming has a serious impact on our planet. Either we do something about it now or we will regret in the future. By then it will be too late. All nations have to educate their people to reduce the consumption of electricity and go for green products.
    __________________
    sizegenetics review exercises patches pills ***** enhancer proenhance
  15. #1215  
    Quote Originally Posted by imike24 View Post
    the snake oil you are selling in your fine print is pure spam.
  16. #1216  
    Now this sounds really promising....a possibly solution that can be used with our current cars and fossil fuel engines with an easy conversion. And with greater potential as fuel cell solutions become viable on a mass production level. Again this is another....almost there thing, but one that I think shows the most potential with dealing with the issue of using it now, having to establish a new distribution system, and with the where the future of cars is heading:

    Clean energy claim: Aluminum in your car tank
    Professor says Energy Department ‘egos’ blocking hydrogen breakthrough

    A Purdue University engineer and National Medal of Technology winner says he's ready and able to start a revolution in clean energy.

    Professor Jerry Woodall and students have invented a way to use an aluminum alloy to extract hydrogen from water — a process that he thinks could replace gasoline as well as its pollutants and emissions tied to global warming.

    But Woodall says there's one big hitch: "Egos" at the U.S. Department of Energy, a key funding source for energy research, "are holding up the revolution."

    ----------------

    "The hydrogen is generated on demand, so you only produce as much as you need when you need it," he said in a statement released by Purdue this week.

    So instead of having to fill up at a station, hydrogen would be made inside vehicles in tanks about the same size as today's gasoline tanks. An internal reaction in those tanks would create hydrogen from water and 350 pounds worth of special pellets. ...............

    The hydrogen would then power an internal combustion engine or a fuel cell stack.

    "It's a simple matter to convert ordinary internal combustion engines to run on hydrogen," Woodall said. "All you have to do is replace the gasoline fuel injector with a hydrogen injector."

    How it works
    Here's how it all happens: Hydrogen is generated spontaneously when water is added to pellets of the alloy, which is made of aluminum and a metal called gallium.

    "When water is added to the pellets, the aluminum in the solid alloy reacts because it has a strong attraction to the oxygen in the water," Woodall said. "No toxic fumes are produced."

    This reaction splits the oxygen and hydrogen contained in water, releasing hydrogen in the process.

    -----------------------

    For Woodall, the biggest speed bump lies elsewhere. "The egos of program managers at DOE are holding up the revolution," he told msnbc.com...........As evidence, Woodall said DOE last summer rejected two "pre-proposals" for funding, "i.e., I was not invited to send in full proposals on my work."


    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18700750/page/2/
  17. #1217  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Now this sounds really promising....a possibly solution that can be used with our current cars and fossil fuel engines with an easy conversion. And with greater potential as fuel cell solutions become viable on a mass production level. Again this is another....almost there thing, but one that I think shows the most potential with dealing with the issue of using it now, having to establish a new distribution system, and with the where the future of cars is heading:

    Clean energy claim: Aluminum in your car tank
    Professor says Energy Department ‘egos’ blocking hydrogen breakthrough
    Thanks for your citation Hobbes, but unfortunately the link does not work for me. The part of the news story that you posted above, where egos are interfering with technological development adds a nice human interest element which captures people's attention. Stories like this I think are encouraging, but in the absence of peer reviewed publication it is hard to know how solid this data is. Overhyping something which does not have a chance of panning out runs a risk of promoting a sense of complacency and encouraging a lack of action on global warming because a solution is perceived to be "just around the corner" when it may not be. At any rate, if you can find peer reviewed references showing the success of this model I would be interested in reviewing them. By the way, did you have a chance to see the China article I referenced above? I thought it was well put together and would be curious as to what others thought about it.
  18. #1218  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Now this sounds really promising....a possibly solution that can be used with our current cars and fossil fuel engines with an easy conversion. And with greater potential as fuel cell solutions become viable on a mass production level. Again this is another....almost there thing, but one that I think shows the most potential with dealing with the issue of using it now, having to establish a new distribution system, and with the where the future of cars is heading:

    Clean energy claim: Aluminum in your car tank
    Professor says Energy Department ‘egos’ blocking hydrogen breakthrough
    Sounds good. Less magic than cold fusion. How many miles does one get from a 350 pound charge? How expensive is gallium? Does the reaction take place at room temperature? I suppose that it is these and similar questions that he needs funding to answer.

    It is tragic that academics think that government is not only the big teat but the only teat. The Cheney/Bush DOE is into Ethanol, not alternative energy sources. Even if he got DOE funding, he might well not make a dime on the idea.

    He needs to follow the startup formula: friends and family, angels, venture capitalists (the venture capitalist raises the money first and then finds ideas to put it in), investment bankers, (auto shows, General Motors) and the stock market. If there is any substance to his idea, he will not have to worry about resistant egos. (He may have to worry about venture capitalists tearing each other's throats out.)
  19. #1219  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    Thanks for your citation Hobbes, but unfortunately the link does not work for me. The part of the news story that you posted above, where egos are interfering with technological development adds a nice human interest element which captures people's attention. Stories like this I think are encouraging, but in the absence of peer reviewed publication it is hard to know how solid this data is. Overhyping something which does not have a chance of panning out runs a risk of promoting a sense of complacency and encouraging a lack of action on global warming because a solution is perceived to be "just around the corner" when it may not be. At any rate, if you can find peer reviewed references showing the success of this model I would be interested in reviewing them. By the way, did you have a chance to see the China article I referenced above? I thought it was well put together and would be curious as to what others thought about it.
    I accidentally put the link to the second page of the article, maybe that is the issue. Either way, try this link:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18700750/

    I understand the premature hype issue, but I did find this more interesting than most. Here is the names of who is doing the research on this:
    The Purdue Research Foundation holds title to the primary patent. And a startup company, AlGalCo LLC, has received a license for the exclusive right to commercialize the process.
    I am on the road right now, but I am sure a quick Google could prove profitable for more information or available extended research.

    No, I have to be honest...I haven't read that article yet.
  20. #1220  
    whmurray.....times like this I wish I had $100 billion dollars as this would have caught my attention enough to learn more about the realistic potential it has to offer with what funding for research.

Posting Permissions