I think there is a "dark-energy-sun" between us and Jupiter. If you look into the night sky towards Jupiter and see a black void, that's where it probably is.
And I can use the Earth's and Jupiter's climate data to make a model to show it is there!
crack me up when it gets hot. Everyone walks around in a tired daze going "oh, this heat is awful. When will it stop?"
That is kinda weird how early Seattle hit 90 degrees. As I recall the best weather months for Seattle and all of western Washington are July, August and September.
Here in SE Arizona it is now sunny, about 73 degrees and windy. We had a stretch of really hot days early this week and we busted out our portable A/C unit. We're gonna forego our swamp cooler this year and use fans and our portable A/C unit. I have started to research getting a Mitsubishi A/C unit for our house. It will come in handy during our monsoon months of mid-July, August and September.
"Currently, the world is at 387 ppm of carbon dioxide. The European Union has aimed for 550 ppm, but Locke said that based on the earth's history, a carbon dioxide concentration of 450 ppm will wipe out all coastal cities.
Scientists believe carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to the global warming trend responsible for melting ice caps at the poles and and glaciers. Locke said Texas can invest in large-scale solar power plants to reduce global warming, and create high-paying jobs for people to work in this industry.
The environment advocate, who was in El Paso this past week, met with various community organizations to discuss climate change and ways to reduce the harmful effects.
Also this week, the Nature Conservancy announced that it plans to release a report next week titled "Implications of Recent Climate Change on Conservation Priorities in New Mexico" by scientists Carolyn Enquist and Dave Gori.
"The report is based on solid science," said Terry Sullivan, Nature Conservancy's state director in Santa Fe. "It establishes without question that climate change is having an effect on the plants, animals and landscapes of New Mexico right now, and that it has been for at least the last 15 years." Key findings in the report include:
# More than 95 percent of New Mexico has experienced rising temperatures. # 54 percent of the state is experiencing wetter conditions. # 41 percent of the state is experiencing drier conditions.
Enquist said the mean annual temperatures in New Mexico have increased 0.6 degrees Fahrenheit per decade, "with an overall change of 1.8 degrees since 1976."
Seriously Lars, it is articles like this where they predict "dust bowl conditions 20 times worse than in the 30's" that really hurt the credibility of these nuts. If they would not exaggerate so much maybe more people would believe them.
Q: Could you rank the things that have the most significant impact and where would you put carbon dioxide on the list?
A: Well let me give you one fact first. In the first 30 feet of the atmosphere, on the average, outward radiation from the Earth, which is what CO2 is supposed to affect, how much [of the reflected energy] is absorbed by water vapor? In the first 30 feet, 80 percent, okay?
Q: Eighty percent of the heat radiated back from the surface is absorbed in the first 30 feet by water vapor…
A: And how much is absorbed by carbon dioxide? Eight hundredths of one percent. One one-thousandth as important as water vapor. You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.
I believe the Nature Conservancy is the group run by that goof ball Robert Kennedy Jr. I get requests for money from them all the time. Their mailing labels are useful. Being a good conservationist I use them. They come with a butterfly and my name and address for use as return address. I wouldn't send them a dime.
As far as NM getting more rain. I would say that is a great. They could use more just as we could use more. As a matter of fact it is raining here today and I was able to turn off my drip system and save some money on water. I say it is a blessing. Of course there are some people that would scream if you stabbed them with a golden knife. :P
He's not a goofball - he's a whitewater enthusiast. :P Runs something called the Waterkeeper Alliance. He's on the opposite side of the Nature Conservancy in the Cape Cod windfarm dispute.
Meanwhile greens are wary that the record cost of oil is going to make GW fuels like tar sands and oil shale more common. Reuters
That is exactly true. I got a couple of those letters begging for money from them and he was the celebrity signatory. Maybe it was to ease his conscious over the Wind farm blockage by him and his uncle.
Rising crude prices were once a no-brainer for U.S. greens; the steeper the price, the more likely car-pooling and public transportation would rise in the world's largest oil consumer and eventually tame demand.
I can tell you it ain't working in San Diego. I hear lots of complaints. I don't see anyone slowing down or less traffic. I think people just suck it up and pay the price. And where there is demand there will be someone to sell product.
For those concerned about US drilling in the Arctic. Take a look at the oil leases up to our border. Canada is not holding back on oil development just because the US has their head up you know where.
Oh, forgot all about the story I read in the Anchorage paper this morning:
"If Congress were to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, crude oil prices would probably drop by an average of only 75 cents a barrel, according to Department of Energy projections issued Thursday."
One thing is the oil traders know a couple things about Arctic oil production. First IF they were to open ANWR it would be 10 years minimum before any oil went down the line. Currently as close as I can tell the flow in the line is about a million barrels a day. That is the current safe load on the old sections of pipe. That line was not designed to go 30 years. When they started on Prudhoe Bay it was expected to run out in about 20 years. They are still getting 300k-400k barrels a day out of the old wells. With all the new fields opening up West of Prudhoe Bay I don't see much sense in heading East for maybe 20 years. I think with the current production and NPR production coming on line the oil companies can maintain a million a day for the next 20 years. If the state builds a gas line that will be separate production and will cut some of the current cost of injection. Those six 25,000 HP turbines forcing the gas back into the field are not cheap to run.
That said I would agree that any moves on the Arctic will have little affect on price.
I hope the state wins their battle over the polar bear fiasco. Making them endangered will not stop the ice from melting. There is NO evidence that oil production has impacted the polar bear. Or made the ice melt. In fact getting all that hot oil out of the Arctic should make it colder.
Actually they say that if they can find ways to capture methane, this would be an almost inexhaustable supply of "nat" gas.
There is also a theory that a lot of the so called "weird" loss of airplanes in the "Bermuda Triangle" ocean waters might be caused by flying through HUGE pockets of (lighter than air) methane; the majority of methane being held by H20 pressure and at depths. Probably 24/7 (relative to infinity) relatively small amounts of methane is being released to the atmosphere. So when an AIRplane hits methane pockets, the altimeter shows rapid gains in altitude while simultaneously diving which might result in a "crash". Finding anything, let alone a specific thing in the oceans can be a herculean task.
We need every one with a gas guzzling SUV to get on the road. I am freezing my butt off in San Diego. We went from GW last week to the Ice age this week. I know larsb has his jacket on in Phoenix. Did ya get any record cold days this week?
PS Have a great holiday. I am going to build a roaring fire to roast some hot dogs.
that's one thing I noticed after moving to Arizona. These people are weather wimps, man. If it's below 70 degrees these natives think it's cold! They wear their jackets if they think they're cold, but, the fact is it's usually about 65-70 degrees out when they're "cold."
My wife and I are turning in to Arizonans ourselves. We were cold and it was about 60 degrees! Happens like boiling a frog in a pan. Just takes a few more years and we'll be wearing our jackets when it's in the 60's and 70's outside. Weather wimps personified!
I hear you. I don't know why I am saying this, but one upon a time in my life I lived in upstate New York. During the winter it can get up to 32 degree's F! (water freezes at 32 degrees, ice for cold drinks etc.) Man that is like a heat wave and I mean hit the snow drifts in swimming trunks. Now? 68 degrees and we are bringing out the flannels, down comforters etc.
I work with patients in a hospital and they like the heat on when it's boiling in their rooms. I break out in a sweat while treating them and then cool off until I have to go in to the next "sweat chamber!" :P
Five days now of near record cold temperatures. I wonder if they kick these days out of their computer models as an anomaly. Aside from a few days of near record warm days, most of this Spring has been near record cold. This is the first time I can remember wearing a jacket at our annual Memorial day picnic. It was COLD all day. May have hit 60 for a short time. Mostly in the mid 50s. No open fires are allowed in this park so one of the guys brought a smudge pot. That puts out some serious heat burning $5 per gallon diesel.
I knew it was coming to a country near US sooner or later.
Every adult should be forced to use a 'carbon ration card' when they pay for petrol, airline tickets or household energy, MPs say.
The influential Environmental Audit Committee says a personal carbon trading scheme is the best and fairest way of cutting Britain's CO2 emissions without penalising the poor.
Under the scheme, everyone would be given an annual carbon allowance to use when buying oil, gas, electricity and flights.
Anyone who exceeds their entitlement would have to buy top-up credits from individuals who haven't used up their allowance. The amount paid would be driven by market forces and the deal done through a specialist company.
ENTER AL GORE AND COMPANY!!!! Get your carbon credits right here. Tuesdays are twofor day. Buy one get one free...
The idea of personal carbon trading is increasingly being promoted by environmentalists. In theory it could be used to cover all purchases - from petrol to food.
For the scheme to work, the Government would need to give out 45 million carbon cards - each one linked to a personal carbon account. Every year, the account would be credited with a notional amount of CO2 in kilograms.
Every time someone makes a purchase of petrol, energy or airline tickets, they would use up credits. A return flight from London to Rome would, for instance, use up 900kg of CO2 credits, while 10 litres of petrol would use up 23kg.
Gary, you had asked me if last week set new "record low HIGHS" and we did not. Friday was 72 for the high, and needed to be 70 or below to set the record for coldest May high temp ever.
We did set one record on Friday the 23rd though. For only the second time since record keeping began in the 1880s, Phoenix had measurable precipitation on May 23rd.
We got half an inch of rain on the 24th. I don't ever remember rain in May. I like it. I turned my watering system off for a week now. That saves me about $13 on my water bill. It was the coldest Memorial Day in memory also. I don't think it hit 60 in any part of the County. Heavy clouds, scattered rain and windy. Just wish it was a warm rain like in Hawaii. I prefer the tropical rains. Who knows we may get it yet. We can always hope for it.
I'd send you some firewood, but between the fact your local government won't let you burn it, and I may have to use some carbon-credits to ship it to you; I really can't.
But I can see Europeans possibly buying into this carbon-credit scheme. I mean they let the government rape any productive members of their society with taxes. Why shouldn't they also let the government tell them how to spend the rest of their money. They've become engrained to think that this is "normal".
It'll be pretty sad if this country goes the way of telling individuals what they can do (for their own good), versus letting people have freedom to spend their money on what they want. I'll move if this country continues to move to the "hive mentality".
LOL! Despite this 2 generation talk of "globalization" MOVE is really the LAST thing they want a "productive member" to do. Conversely that probably is EXACTLY the best thing to do.
34 years ago I (was) moved from NorCA to upstate New York and it was in a state of arrested decay THEN. In terms of industry, it was like a nuclear weapon went off but nobody said anything!!?? Folks continue the exodus to this day, high taxation being a symptom. Mercifully I (was) moved to Florida where it was literally a night and day difference.
I was thinking more like Costa Rica; or checking out Australia, New Zealand, or some other laid back areas of the world. I certainly don't want to live in a country that's cold, wants to control every aspect of your life, and somehow feels we need to be international "cop and patronizer" to every other country.
I don't think many of you are going to want to live in 5-10 years in a carbon-credit world, with cameras on every street corner, expensive nationalized medicine, where you're eternally being chided for not doing enough to save the Earth (save it from what I don't know, since there'll be all sorts of life here for hundreds of millions of years).
I have a 75 year old widower friend in San Jose Costa Rica. He loves it there. Only comes back to renew his Visa and do his taxes. Land and property are being bought up by the Germans and other Europeans. US citizens are considered tire kickers and the realtors are not very interested in helping. I would rent there. Very reasonable with a wide variety of locations. I would consider it if I was single for sure You can drive down all the way. I would not take a real expensive vehicle.
Washington - Czech President Vaclav Klaus said Tuesday he is ready to debate Al Gore about global warming, as he presented the English version of his latest book that argues environmentalism poses a threat to basic human freedoms. "I many times tried to talk to have a public exchange of views with him, and he's not too much willing to make such a conversation," Klaus said. "So I'm ready to do it."
Klaus was speaking a the National Press Building in Washington to present his new book, Blue Planet in Green Shackles - What Is Endangered: Climate or Freedom?, before meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney Wednesday.
"My answer is it is our freedom and, I might add, and our prosperity," he said.
Gore a former US vice president who has become a leading international voice in the cause against global warming, was co-winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize. Gore's effort was highlighted by his Oscar winning documentary film An Inconvienent Truth.
Klaus, an economist, said he opposed the "climate alarmism" perpetuated by environmentalism trying to impose their ideals, comparing it to the decades of communist rule he experienced growing up in Soviet-dominated Czechoslovakia.
"Like their (communist) predecessors, they will be certain that they have the right to sacrifice man and his freedom to make their idea reality," he said.
"In the past, it was in the name of the Marxists or of the proletariat - this time, in the name of the planet," he added.
Klaus said a free market should be used to address environmental concerns and said he oppposed as unrealistic regulations or greenhouse gas capping systems designed to reduce the impact of climate change.
"It could be even true that we are now at a stage where mere facts, reason and truths are powerless in the face of the global warming propaganda," he said.
Klaus alleged that the global warming was being championed by scientists and other environmentalists whose careers and funding requires selling the public on global warming.
"It is in the hands of climatologists and other related scientists who are highly motivated to look in one direction only," Klaus said.
"We can’t keep deceiving ourselves by thinking that nothing is happening and that we can continue our consumer way of life happily and without resolving threats to the climate." that other Czech guy you may have heard of
"We can’t keep deceiving ourselves by thinking that nothing is happening and that we can continue our consumer way of life happily and without resolving threats to the climate."
Looks like the Czech's have their own kooks to deal with. We are NOT going back to 1990 levels of CO2. Those that advocate that are living in some lala land. The world is expanding industrially at a record level. If coal is all that is left to keep it going. Well that is what will be used. No matter how much environmentalist scream that the end is near. I wanted nuclear when it was not popular. I wanted geo thermal and the wacko environmentalist along with the pagans have blocked most of that. So if it is going to be coal lets get with it. Clean it best we can and live our lives. I am glad to see there are leaders willing to question the flawed science we are having shoved down our throats by those looking to make a fortune off of GW. Al Gore needs to go back to his mega mansion in TN and count his millions of ill gotten gain. I could not sleep at night if I had scammed the world as he has.
NEW YORK (Fortune) -- An influential coalition of Fortune 500 companies and environmental groups that was formed to support climate-change legislation has splintered over the Lieberman-Warner bill that is headed next week to the Senate floor.
The U.S. Climate Action Partnership formed last year won't take a position on the bill, although nine of its members - including General Electric (GE, Fortune 500), Alcoa (AA, Fortune 500) and four utility companies - signed a letter to senators backing the legislation.
The letter, also signed by big environmental groups and obtained by Fortune, says: "Prompt action on climate change is essential to protect America's economy, security, quality of life and natural environment."
But other members of the coalition known as U.S. Cap, most visibly Duke Energy (DUK, Fortune 500), a coal-burning utility, are strongly opposed. "It's going to translate into significant electricity price increases," says Jim Rogers, Duke's CEO.
Without widespread corporate support, passage of the bill - already a long shot at best - becomes even more unlikely this year. President Bush remains opposed. House Democrats have been slow to act.
We can thank our lucky stars that a few people have their heads screwed on right. This bill would have started the ball rolling on carbon credit taxes and much higher fuel and utility bills.
Here is some of what would be needed to bring the U.S. to just 20% of its electricity needs using wind. I don't think 20% counts on having millions of EV's needing electricity also.
I personally like wind generation. I see it as limited due to environmental wackos and rich sailors blocking many potentially good locations. In CA it is easiest to locate them on Indian land. It is also a good source of revenue for the tribes.
it'll cost tens of billions to pay for major transmission lines to carry wind energy from wind-rich locations like North Dakota to energy-burning urban areas such as Minneapolis. "There's a tremendous capital-market attraction to invest in transmission," he said. "It's low risk. The big issues are the siting [of transmission lines] and effectively having the right jurisdiction to allow you to build." Armistead added that the value of U.S. wind assets in places like East Texas is being dampened by a lack of transmission-line capacity.
This is the other problem in CA. We were driving through one of the Indian reservations that are fighting against power lines running through their land. It is generated by another tribe and they want a bigger cut of the profits I would assume. I would think that 20% is pretty optimistic considering the hassle getting permits and land.
ScienceDaily (May 30, 2008) — Yale University scientists reported that they may have resolved a controversial glitch in models of global warming: A key part of the atmosphere didn't seem to be warming as expected.
Computer models and basic principles predict atmospheric temperatures should rise slightly faster than, not lag, increases in surface temperatures. Also, the models predict the fastest warming should occur at the Tropics at an altitude between eight and 12 kilometers. However, temperature readings taken from weather balloons and satellites have, according to most analysts, shown little if any warming there compared to the surface.
By measuring changes in winds, rather than relying upon problematic temperature measurements, Robert J. Allen and Steven C. Sherwood of the Department of Geology and Geophysics at Yale estimated the atmospheric temperatures near 10 km in the Tropics rose about 0.65 degrees Celsius per decade since 1970—probably the fastest warming rate anywhere in Earth's atmosphere. The temperature increase is in line with predictions of global warming models.
“I think this puts to rest any lingering doubts that the atmosphere really has been warming up more or less as we expect, due mainly to the greenhouse effect of increasing gases like carbon dioxide,” Sherwood said.
Many scientists, including Allen and Sherwood, have long argued that temperature data were flawed for many reasons such as the change of instrument design over the years. “These systems were never designed for measuring climate change,” said Sherwood. However, some global warming skeptics had argued that weather balloon temperatures were accurate—and models that predicted global warming were wrong.
Allen and Sherwood predicted that measuring thermal winds, which are tied to fluctuations in temperatures, would be a more accurate gauge of true atmospheric warming than the thermometers. To measure the thermal winds, they studied data on the motion of weather balloons at different altitudes in the atmosphere. They then calculated temperatures that would account for the wind velocity recorded.
The findings were reported online May 18 in the journal Nature Geoscience.
Many scientists, including Allen and Sherwood, have long argued that temperature data were flawed for many reasons such as the change of instrument design over the years. “These systems were never designed for measuring climate change,”
Yes that has been my logical view from a non scientific mind.
So now they have found some data that they can add to their computer model that backs up their thinking? That still does not address the fact that ocean temperatures have not risen in this period they claim we have had climate change. IF the planet's oceans have the most influence over climate change we should see a rise in the ocean temperatures. The latest research by scientists does not back up Global Warming.
I think it is a case of I got it, I ain't got it by scientists that do not want to look like they could be wrong. Though thermal winds may be a good indicator. Only time will tell. Say, 100 years.
Do you live in the Ocean, Gary? I bet you don't. In fact, I don't think any humans do. So I suppose what we need to concern ourselves with are the temps in areas where human population exists.
And some have been colder. This was a long winter for many in the USA. Like you said many times the temperature at home has nothing to do with climate change.
IF the planet's oceans have the most influence over climate change we should see a rise in the ocean temperatures.
Surely someone who wants to prove GW will simply dismiss the ocean temperature and see if the speed of the currents have changed - and whether they increased or decreased work that mathematically into their model showing proof of GW.
I took a course in college - looking at the book on the shelf right now - Mathematical methods in Chemical Engineering - which dealt with 2nd order partial non-linear differential equations, and making such models; and it really isn't too hard to make a theory of anything you want. It's proving that the model is worth anything that is important.
So scientists can make all the models and theories they want; let me know when they get it right. It sounds like there are 100 models out there, you can't believe the temp. you can believe it ... a bunch of conjecture, which politicians are jumping on prematurely, to gain power and notoriety.
All the talk about doubting a model is just wasted breath. Models matter less than what is really going on - which is 19 of the last 25 years being warmer than normal.
Apparently, it's impossible to figure out what to do without playing the "dueling models" game.
All the talk about doubting a model is just wasted breath. Models matter less than what is really going on - which is 19 of the last 25 years being warmer than normal.
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO
The article you just posted, admitted your airport thermometer data was not accurate enough to determine climate change. Or global warming. You need to just toss that single tidbit of useless information out your office window. Even the GW scientists do not consider it of any value.
Comments
And I can use the Earth's and Jupiter's climate data to make a model to show it is there!
That is kinda weird how early Seattle hit 90 degrees. As I recall the best weather months for Seattle and all of western Washington are July, August and September.
Here in SE Arizona it is now sunny, about 73 degrees and windy. We had a stretch of really hot days early this week and we busted out our portable A/C unit. We're gonna forego our swamp cooler this year and use fans and our portable A/C unit. I have started to research getting a Mitsubishi A/C unit for our house. It will come in handy during our monsoon months of mid-July, August and September.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
"Currently, the world is at 387 ppm of carbon dioxide. The European Union has aimed for 550 ppm, but Locke said that based on the earth's history, a carbon dioxide concentration of 450 ppm will wipe out all coastal cities.
Scientists believe carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to the global warming trend responsible for melting ice caps at the poles and and glaciers. Locke said Texas can invest in large-scale solar power plants to reduce global warming, and create high-paying jobs for people to work in this industry.
The environment advocate, who was in El Paso this past week, met with various community organizations to discuss climate change and ways to reduce the harmful effects.
Also this week, the Nature Conservancy announced that it plans to release a report next week titled "Implications of Recent Climate Change on Conservation Priorities in New Mexico" by scientists Carolyn Enquist and Dave Gori.
"The report is based on solid science," said Terry Sullivan, Nature Conservancy's state director in Santa Fe. "It establishes without question that climate change is having an effect on the plants, animals and landscapes of New Mexico right now, and that it has been for at least the last 15 years." Key findings in the report include:
# More than 95 percent of New Mexico has experienced rising temperatures.
# 54 percent of the state is experiencing wetter conditions.
# 41 percent of the state is experiencing drier conditions.
Enquist said the mean annual temperatures in New Mexico have increased 0.6 degrees Fahrenheit per decade, "with an overall change of 1.8 degrees since 1976."
Twenty times worse than in the 30's? PLEASE.....
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Q: Could you rank the things that have the most significant impact and where would you put carbon dioxide on the list?
A: Well let me give you one fact first. In the first 30 feet of the atmosphere, on the average, outward radiation from the Earth, which is what CO2 is supposed to affect, how much [of the reflected energy] is absorbed by water vapor? In the first 30 feet, 80 percent, okay?
Q: Eighty percent of the heat radiated back from the surface is absorbed in the first 30 feet by water vapor…
A: And how much is absorbed by carbon dioxide? Eight hundredths of one percent. One one-thousandth as important as water vapor. You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.
As far as NM getting more rain. I would say that is a great. They could use more just as we could use more. As a matter of fact it is raining here today and I was able to turn off my drip system and save some money on water. I say it is a blessing. Of course there are some people that would scream if you stabbed them with a golden knife. :P
Meanwhile greens are wary that the record cost of oil is going to make GW fuels like tar sands and oil shale more common. Reuters
Rising crude prices were once a no-brainer for U.S. greens; the steeper the price, the more likely car-pooling and public transportation would rise in the world's largest oil consumer and eventually tame demand.
I can tell you it ain't working in San Diego. I hear lots of complaints. I don't see anyone slowing down or less traffic. I think people just suck it up and pay the price. And where there is demand there will be someone to sell product.
For those concerned about US drilling in the Arctic. Take a look at the oil leases up to our border. Canada is not holding back on oil development just because the US has their head up you know where.
http://assets.panda.org/img/original/mackenzievalley_oil_gas_map.jpg
"If Congress were to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, crude oil prices would probably drop by an average of only 75 cents a barrel, according to Department of Energy projections issued Thursday."
Effect of ANWR oil on prices would be minor (Anchorage Daily News)
Hmmm, I guess this is more of a gas prices story than a climate change one though.
That said I would agree that any moves on the Arctic will have little affect on price.
I hope the state wins their battle over the polar bear fiasco. Making them endangered will not stop the ice from melting. There is NO evidence that oil production has impacted the polar bear. Or made the ice melt. In fact getting all that hot oil out of the Arctic should make it colder.
No word on whether the video accompanying the text was also from the The Day After Tomorrow movie.
The announcer in this BBC clips sounds like a dead ringer for Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear.
Sort of related: Methane rise points to wetlands
There is also a theory that a lot of the so called "weird" loss of airplanes in the "Bermuda Triangle" ocean waters might be caused by flying through HUGE pockets of (lighter than air) methane; the majority of methane being held by H20 pressure and at depths. Probably 24/7 (relative to infinity) relatively small amounts of methane is being released to the atmosphere. So when an AIRplane hits methane pockets, the altimeter shows rapid gains in altitude while simultaneously diving which might result in a "crash". Finding anything, let alone a specific thing in the oceans can be a herculean task.
PS
Have a great holiday. I am going to build a roaring fire to roast some hot dogs.
My wife and I are turning in to Arizonans ourselves. We were cold and it was about 60 degrees! Happens like boiling a frog in a pan. Just takes a few more years and we'll be wearing our jackets when it's in the 60's and 70's outside. Weather wimps personified!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Nah, just turn up the heat in your Lancer and you'll be fine.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Every adult should be forced to use a 'carbon ration card' when they pay for petrol, airline tickets or household energy, MPs say.
The influential Environmental Audit Committee says a personal carbon trading scheme is the best and fairest way of cutting Britain's CO2 emissions without penalising the poor.
Under the scheme, everyone would be given an annual carbon allowance to use when buying oil, gas, electricity and flights.
Anyone who exceeds their entitlement would have to buy top-up credits from individuals who haven't used up their allowance. The amount paid would be driven by market forces and the deal done through a specialist company.
ENTER AL GORE AND COMPANY!!!! Get your carbon credits right here. Tuesdays are twofor day. Buy one get one free...
The idea of personal carbon trading is increasingly being promoted by environmentalists. In theory it could be used to cover all purchases - from petrol to food.
For the scheme to work, the Government would need to give out 45 million carbon cards - each one linked to a personal carbon account. Every year, the account would be credited with a notional amount of CO2 in kilograms.
Every time someone makes a purchase of petrol, energy or airline tickets, they would use up credits. A return flight from London to Rome would, for instance, use up 900kg of CO2 credits, while 10 litres of petrol would use up 23kg.
We did set one record on Friday the 23rd though. For only the second time since record keeping began in the 1880s, Phoenix had measurable precipitation on May 23rd.
0.05 inches.
Stop Global Raining !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL
I'd send you some firewood, but between the fact your local government won't let you burn it, and I may have to use some carbon-credits to ship it to you; I really can't.
But I can see Europeans possibly buying into this carbon-credit scheme. I mean they let the government rape any productive members of their society with taxes. Why shouldn't they also let the government tell them how to spend the rest of their money. They've become engrained to think that this is "normal".
It'll be pretty sad if this country goes the way of telling individuals what they can do (for their own good), versus letting people have freedom to spend their money on what they want. I'll move if this country continues to move to the "hive mentality".
34 years ago I (was) moved from NorCA to upstate New York and it was in a state of arrested decay THEN. In terms of industry, it was like a nuclear weapon went off but nobody said anything!!?? Folks continue the exodus to this day, high taxation being a symptom. Mercifully I (was) moved to Florida where it was literally a night and day difference.
I don't think many of you are going to want to live in 5-10 years in a carbon-credit world, with cameras on every street corner, expensive nationalized medicine, where you're eternally being chided for not doing enough to save the Earth (save it from what I don't know, since there'll be all sorts of life here for hundreds of millions of years).
I have a 75 year old widower friend in San Jose Costa Rica. He loves it there. Only comes back to renew his Visa and do his taxes. Land and property are being bought up by the Germans and other Europeans. US citizens are considered tire kickers and the realtors are not very interested in helping. I would rent there. Very reasonable with a wide variety of locations. I would consider it if I was single for sure
Klaus was speaking a the National Press Building in Washington to present his new book, Blue Planet in Green Shackles - What Is Endangered: Climate or Freedom?, before meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney Wednesday.
"My answer is it is our freedom and, I might add, and our prosperity," he said.
Gore a former US vice president who has become a leading international voice in the cause against global warming, was co-winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize. Gore's effort was highlighted by his Oscar winning documentary film An Inconvienent Truth.
Klaus, an economist, said he opposed the "climate alarmism" perpetuated by environmentalism trying to impose their ideals, comparing it to the decades of communist rule he experienced growing up in Soviet-dominated Czechoslovakia.
"Like their (communist) predecessors, they will be certain that they have the right to sacrifice man and his freedom to make their idea reality," he said.
"In the past, it was in the name of the Marxists or of the proletariat - this time, in the name of the planet," he added.
Klaus said a free market should be used to address environmental concerns and said he oppposed as unrealistic regulations or greenhouse gas capping systems designed to reduce the impact of climate change.
"It could be even true that we are now at a stage where mere facts, reason and truths are powerless in the face of the global warming propaganda," he said.
Klaus alleged that the global warming was being championed by scientists and other environmentalists whose careers and funding requires selling the public on global warming.
"It is in the hands of climatologists and other related scientists who are highly motivated to look in one direction only," Klaus said.
Gore given Challenge
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Oh, guess you mean the Klaus guy....
:P
"We can’t keep deceiving ourselves by thinking that nothing is happening and that we can continue our consumer way of life happily and without resolving threats to the climate." that other Czech guy you may have heard of
Would you like to buy some carbon credits? I just printed up a batch and I will let them go cheap!! :shades:
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Looks like the Czech's have their own kooks to deal with. We are NOT going back to 1990 levels of CO2. Those that advocate that are living in some lala land. The world is expanding industrially at a record level. If coal is all that is left to keep it going. Well that is what will be used. No matter how much environmentalist scream that the end is near. I wanted nuclear when it was not popular. I wanted geo thermal and the wacko environmentalist along with the pagans have blocked most of that. So if it is going to be coal lets get with it. Clean it best we can and live our lives. I am glad to see there are leaders willing to question the flawed science we are having shoved down our throats by those looking to make a fortune off of GW. Al Gore needs to go back to his mega mansion in TN and count his millions of ill gotten gain. I could not sleep at night if I had scammed the world as he has.
The U.S. Climate Action Partnership formed last year won't take a position on the bill, although nine of its members - including General Electric (GE, Fortune 500), Alcoa (AA, Fortune 500) and four utility companies - signed a letter to senators backing the legislation.
The letter, also signed by big environmental groups and obtained by Fortune, says: "Prompt action on climate change is essential to protect America's economy, security, quality of life and natural environment."
But other members of the coalition known as U.S. Cap, most visibly Duke Energy (DUK, Fortune 500), a coal-burning utility, are strongly opposed. "It's going to translate into significant electricity price increases," says Jim Rogers, Duke's CEO.
Without widespread corporate support, passage of the bill - already a long shot at best - becomes even more unlikely this year. President Bush remains opposed. House Democrats have been slow to act.
We can thank our lucky stars that a few people have their heads screwed on right. This bill would have started the ball rolling on carbon credit taxes and much higher fuel and utility bills.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/wind-energy-leaders-call-washington-help/s- tory.aspx?guid=%7B255B6A78%2D6896%2D4595%2DB0BA%2D2832150EA9DE%7D
it'll cost tens of billions to pay for major transmission lines to carry wind energy from wind-rich locations like North Dakota to energy-burning urban areas such as Minneapolis.
"There's a tremendous capital-market attraction to invest in transmission," he said. "It's low risk. The big issues are the siting [of transmission lines] and effectively having the right jurisdiction to allow you to build."
Armistead added that the value of U.S. wind assets in places like East Texas is being dampened by a lack of transmission-line capacity.
This is the other problem in CA. We were driving through one of the Indian reservations that are fighting against power lines running through their land. It is generated by another tribe and they want a bigger cut of the profits I would assume. I would think that 20% is pretty optimistic considering the hassle getting permits and land.
ScienceDaily (May 30, 2008) — Yale University scientists reported that they may have resolved a controversial glitch in models of global warming: A key part of the atmosphere didn't seem to be warming as expected.
Computer models and basic principles predict atmospheric temperatures should rise slightly faster than, not lag, increases in surface temperatures. Also, the models predict the fastest warming should occur at the Tropics at an altitude between eight and 12 kilometers. However, temperature readings taken from weather balloons and satellites have, according to most analysts, shown little if any warming there compared to the surface.
By measuring changes in winds, rather than relying upon problematic temperature measurements, Robert J. Allen and Steven C. Sherwood of the Department of Geology and Geophysics at Yale estimated the atmospheric temperatures near 10 km in the Tropics rose about 0.65 degrees Celsius per decade since 1970—probably the fastest warming rate anywhere in Earth's atmosphere. The temperature increase is in line with predictions of global warming models.
“I think this puts to rest any lingering doubts that the atmosphere really has been warming up more or less as we expect, due mainly to the greenhouse effect of increasing gases like carbon dioxide,” Sherwood said.
Many scientists, including Allen and Sherwood, have long argued that temperature data were flawed for many reasons such as the change of instrument design over the years. “These systems were never designed for measuring climate change,” said Sherwood. However, some global warming skeptics had argued that weather balloon temperatures were accurate—and models that predicted global warming were wrong.
Allen and Sherwood predicted that measuring thermal winds, which are tied to fluctuations in temperatures, would be a more accurate gauge of true atmospheric warming than the thermometers. To measure the thermal winds, they studied data on the motion of weather balloons at different altitudes in the atmosphere. They then calculated temperatures that would account for the wind velocity recorded.
The findings were reported online May 18 in the journal Nature Geoscience.
Yes that has been my logical view from a non scientific mind.
So now they have found some data that they can add to their computer model that backs up their thinking? That still does not address the fact that ocean temperatures have not risen in this period they claim we have had climate change. IF the planet's oceans have the most influence over climate change we should see a rise in the ocean temperatures. The latest research by scientists does not back up Global Warming.
I think it is a case of I got it, I ain't got it by scientists that do not want to look like they could be wrong. Though thermal winds may be a good indicator. Only time will tell. Say, 100 years.
And THOSE AREAS have been warmer lately.
And some have been colder. This was a long winter for many in the USA. Like you said many times the temperature at home has nothing to do with climate change.
Surely someone who wants to prove GW will simply dismiss the ocean temperature and see if the speed of the currents have changed - and whether they increased or decreased work that mathematically into their model showing proof of GW.
I took a course in college - looking at the book on the shelf right now - Mathematical methods in Chemical Engineering - which dealt with 2nd order partial non-linear differential equations, and making such models; and it really isn't too hard to make a theory of anything you want. It's proving that the model is worth anything that is important.
So scientists can make all the models and theories they want; let me know when they get it right. It sounds like there are 100 models out there, you can't believe the temp. you can believe it ... a bunch of conjecture, which politicians are jumping on prematurely, to gain power and notoriety.
Apparently, it's impossible to figure out what to do without playing the "dueling models" game.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO
The article you just posted, admitted your airport thermometer data was not accurate enough to determine climate change. Or global warming. You need to just toss that single tidbit of useless information out your office window. Even the GW scientists do not consider it of any value.
If not that data, what do we have to gauge climate change? NOTHING, that's what.