Global Warming Decimates Glaciers - In 1910 [Archive] - Debate Policy

pete311

12-07-2016, 07:01 PM

Horse-poop...it has been proven.

Try researching the USGS comments on such a thing.

You mean like this one?
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html

This seems like a huge amount of CO2, but a visit to the U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) website (http://cdiac.ornl.gov/) helps anyone armed with a handheld calculator and a high school chemistry text put the volcanic CO2 tally into perspective. Because while 200 million tonnes of CO2 is large, the global fossil fuel CO2emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes. Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value.

A short time ago (geologically speaking) the question "Which produces more CO2, volcanic or human activity?" would have been answered differently. Volcanoes would have tipped the scale. Now, human presence, activity, and the resultant production of CO2, through the burning of fossil fuels, have all climbed at an ever-increasing rate. On the other hand, looking back through the comparatively short duration of human history, volcanic activity has, with a few notable disturbances, remained relatively steady.

Volcanoes are still awesome, even though they don't produce CO2 at a rate that swamps the human signature, contributing to global warming. In fact, spectacular eruptions like that of Mount Pinatubo are demonstrated to contribute to global cooling through the injection of solar energy reflecting ash and other small particles.

Elessar

12-07-2016, 07:24 PM

You mean like this one?
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html

That is relatively neutral. Fact is, several eruptions a year will make man's footprint
pretty mute.

pete311

12-07-2016, 07:30 PM

That is relatively neutral. Fact is, several eruptions a year will make man's footprint
pretty mute.

I don't think you read it correctly

Elessar

12-07-2016, 07:33 PM

I don't think you read it correctly

I sure have, many times over.

It is global change which is recorded through research and history.

A naturally occurring fact.

2007 as a basis? Things have become much more sophisticated in 9 years.

pete311

12-07-2016, 08:31 PM

I sure have, many times over.

It is global change which is recorded through research and history.

A naturally occurring fact.

2007 as a basis? Things have become much more sophisticated in 9 years.

You must have missed reading what's in my quote above. What is a naturally occurring fact? What does global change have to do with volcanoes vs humans C02 levels. 2007 is what I found quickly. You find something more recent then that disputes the claim otherwise it stands.

aboutime

12-07-2016, 08:54 PM

Somebody. Please say it isn't so? Don't tell us that pete is now another AL GORE wannabe since pete has been constantly defeated with all of his Political BS?
Pete. Other than the same degree the rest of us have here....98.6, what degree do you now claim to have relative to GLOBAL WARMING in 1910, and Today???

pete311

12-07-2016, 09:31 PM

aboutime

12-07-2016, 09:39 PM

:lol::clap:

Thanks pete. Glad you agree with me about how foolish you look here.:lol::clap:

NightTrain

12-08-2016, 12:53 AM

Petey, don't tell me that you're buying into man-made global warming again?

We already went through this and you lost. Badly.

Did you forget already?

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

12-08-2016, 06:42 AM

https://www.newspapers.com/image/71208161/?terms=arapahoe%2Bglacier%2Bmelting

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9527&stc=1

Chevy Suburbans? Bovine methane emissions? Too many woodstoves? Overabundance of Carrier Pigeons?

:smoke:

Maybe it is the over abundance of people-now causing global warming.:rolleyes:
Yep, that is the ticket, now the libs/leftists/socialists can cry to do what they are known for-
elimination of a few hundred million people as a start!
Global warming is a hoax -promoted by the globalists.
The globalists that think the earth can only support at max 1.1 billion people!
And since we are a few billions over that they want to eliminate that excess.
Now they control the dem party and already have reached into just about every government(already very heavily into ours!) in the world. Fact.--Tyr

aboutime

12-09-2016, 07:14 PM

Petey, don't tell me that you're buying into man-made global warming again?

We already went through this and you lost. Badly.

Did you forget already?

NightTrain. Just a reminder, if you don't mind? Remember that LIARS never remember their first, or second, or third, and possibly fourth lies. So they have to keep making them up as they go. Trying to convince everybody who REMEMBERS that they lied..that what they are saying isn't a lie.

It's a LOSE - LOSE for liars. Just look at Obama, and Clinton...then think of Pete.

Drummond

12-09-2016, 07:47 PM

The point is that it hasn't changed this drastically this fast and it perfectly coincides with human activity.
Our planet goes through cycles of warming and cooling. It's done so for considerably longer than Humanity itself has been around.

Since that's so, how on earth can you KNOW what the speed of other such fluctuations has been ? Who, BEFORE humans were around to measure or even experience any of this, can possibly attest to what you're claiming ??

But here's another point (one I've posted on before)---

Pete, let's say for arguments' sake that we, ahem, 'really should' buy into all that's said about man-made global warming. Well .. if we believed those scientists who preach all this, we'd also believe that if we curb our 'harmful' emissions enough, we can fix this problem.

Here's the thing. Whatever pollutants are in the atmosphere - including raised CO2 levels, h'mm ?? - ARE in the atmosphere ALREADY. They're going precisely nowhere !! We have no remedy, no method, for getting rid of them. So - what's done is done.

All we could possibly do is curb the rate by which we add to whatever's ALREADY THERE. We can't even quickly reinvent our technologies to something that STOPS that pollution entirely !!

It's this truth, Pete, that convinces me of just how much hogwash you Leftie doom-mongers, who insist we must cut back on emission levels 'because of global warming', are preaching to us. We CANNOT fix the problem you claim exists, much though you claim that it's possible. So --- what's really behind all the measures preached about as being 'necessary' ?

pete311

12-09-2016, 08:56 PM

Our planet goes through cycles of warming and cooling. It's done so for considerably longer than Humanity itself has been around.

True, so what.

Since that's so, how on earth can you KNOW what the speed of other such fluctuations has been ? Who, BEFORE humans were around to measure or even experience any of this, can possibly attest to what you're claiming ??

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/mar/07/past-climate-temperature-proxies
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/ice_core_co2.html

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9528&stc=1

Here's the thing. Whatever pollutants are in the atmosphere - including raised CO2 levels, h'mm ?? - ARE in the atmosphere ALREADY. They're going precisely nowhere !! We have no remedy, no method, for getting rid of them. So - what's done is done.

Did you forget that plants intake C02? In fact the ocean adsorbs the most.

It's this truth, Pete, that convinces me of just how much hogwash you Leftie doom-mongers, who insist we must cut back on emission levels 'because of global warming', are preaching to us. We CANNOT fix the problem you claim exists, much though you claim that it's possible. So --- what's really behind all the measures preached about as being 'necessary' ?

I've made no political comments on the issue, just stating the science. It's clear you have made stout opinions without actually researching. Scientists research this stuff for decades and it can become extremely technical, but you just sit in your chair and let your opinions come via daydream. That is troubling.

aboutime

12-09-2016, 09:01 PM

Let's hear it for pete. Probably one of the most consistent liberals on DP who is most willing to REPEAT, and REPEAT, and REPEAT until HE BELIEVES IT.

Pete..can we call you AL? As in AL GORE? Academy Award Winning Hoaxter.

pete311

12-09-2016, 09:23 PM

Drummond

12-09-2016, 09:26 PM

True, so what.

So ... everything !

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/mar/07/past-climate-temperature-proxies
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/ice_core_co2.html

The Guardian article (even if it WAS published by a Leftie paper) was interesting. I'm still not convinced that the speed of fluctuation is precise enough to cover my objection. Nonetheless ... the article does illustrate how LITTLE Mankind has done to contribute to the Earth's CYCLICAL temperature fluctuations.

Did you forget that plants intake C02? In fact the ocean adsorbs the most.

Well, obviously, if present CO2 levels aren't dropping, the oceans aren't up to the task of absorbing enough to be any remedy.

See this ....

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/ocean-losing-its-ability-to-absorb-increasing-carbon-dioxide-emissions-says-report-20140909-10ejo1.html

The WMO report also contained details on the increased acidification of the world's oceans, noting the level is "unprecedented" over the past 300 million years.

"The ocean's acidity increase is already measurable as oceans take up about 4 kilograms of CO2 per day per person," the report said.

Katrin Meissner, an oceanographer and climate modeller at the University of NSW, said physical and biological processes under way will curb the ability of oceans to absorb C02, leaving more of it in the atmosphere.

The warming of the ocean surface reduces its ability to take up more CO2 as does its increased acidity, Professor Meissner said.

Since the warmer surface waters are lighter, there is less exchange with the deeper ocean, which also reduces the absorption ability. In turn, the reduced mixing of waters will mean fewer nutrients will be brought to the surface, altering the ecology of the seas and reducing the biological uptake of carbon, she said.

"The prediction is that all three [processes] are going to slow down," Professor Meissner said.

As for plants ... that might be a fair point ... arguably. But consider ... Mankind is DESTROYING plant life. We're steadily engaged in massive deforestation enterprises.

That's only part of the point. If you're going to argue that more plant life is needed to absorb CO2 ... then, it has to be planted. It has to have time to grow, in order for the remedy to work.

Do we have that time ? ARE we planting the 'necessary' plants AT ALL ? Or, are we too engaged in deforestations ?

I hear nothing of any of this from 'experts' who say we must tackle global warming. Strange .. eh ? From them, it's all about cutting emissions. Cutting emissions only slows the rate by which pollution INCREASES.

I've made no political comments on the issue, just stating the science. It's clear you have made stout opinions without actually researching. Scientists research this stuff for decades and it can become extremely technical, but you just sit in your chair and let your opinions come via daydream. That is troubling.

You are the one daydreaming ... about a mythical threat. This planet undergoes cycles of temperature fluctuations, known to have been happening, EVEN as YOUR material shows, for at least HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS. Leftie doom-mongers recommend measures that are useless ... which is strange, if they were truly intent upon dealing with a real threat.

I ask again (hopefully more clearly this time ?). What is the real agenda in all of this ?

pete311

12-09-2016, 11:03 PM

I ask again (hopefully more clearly this time ?). What is the real agenda in all of this ?

I'm just stating the science. Leave the agenda to the politicians. But I will always advocate for being good stewards of our planet. Trash it and we will reap the consequences.

Gunny

12-10-2016, 12:15 AM

Great content, thank you

really.

If I spent the time and effort Drummond did giving you a legitimate response jus to get a couple of 2-worders?

I'd be pissed and it's why I just quit engaging in circle jerks with assholes. Your argument sucks. If you don't like how the Earth turns we'll just stop it so you get off.

Other wise do you actually believe all us insects can alter the Universe? That mentality reeks od nothing but Man's arrogance. You are not the master of your destiny, nor this planet's. Get over it.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

12-10-2016, 06:35 AM

really.

If I spent the time and effort Drummond did giving you a legitimate response jus to get a couple of 2-worders?

I'd be pissed and it's why I just quit engaging in circle jerks with assholes. Your argument sucks. If you don't like how the Earth turns we'll just stop it so you get off.

Other wise do you actually believe all us insects can alter the Universe? That mentality reeks od nothing but Man's arrogance. You are not the master of your destiny, nor this planet's. Get over it.

Man's arrogance rarely knows a limit.
True, with the caveat that only with nukes (A-bombs and H-bombs) can man now quickly alter this planet doing major and lasting harm..
However, that has nothing to do with the climate change that they claim comes from man's industrial progress, automobile exhaust, use of coal to provide electricity, etc......
The entire thing is a scam, used to push several political agendas that are in the lib/socialist/leftist ideology.
Key being that it is junk science engineered to present a pre-planned course of action.
Petey, truly may be too damn stupid to see it.. He is in a rather large group if that is true, as sadly, America now has its libs and other assorted educated asses/morons/brainwashed lemmings...--Tyr

Drummond

12-10-2016, 07:53 AM

I'm just stating the science. Leave the agenda to the politicians.

Nope. You're peddling the bog standard 'we must clean up our act, save the planet, by cutting emissions' line ... whether directly or indirectly. What I've done is to show you that the argument is bogus.

But I will always advocate for being good stewards of our planet. Trash it and we will reap the consequences.

See what I mean ?

If the global warming issue was truly our OWN fault - and ignoring all the other dips and rises there've been, over hundreds of millions of years (!!) - then scientists engaged on this problem would be pushing realistic remedies, not any bogus ones. Cutting emissions would only stem the rate at which pollution is added to. It does nothing to deal with what we're told is out there already, 'damaging our environment'.

But we're told that THIS is crucial to dealing with the 'problem'.

Nope, Pete. This is nonsense. You're peddling the Leftie message on our 'dastardly' conduct, and you aren't revising it .. I'm correct in saying that wild horses couldn't drag you to a position where you would, could they ?

I'll approach this in either of two ways.

1. I'll ask you once again. What is the REAL agenda here ??

2. You might just cut to the chase, and admit that Tyr is correct when he says that a Leftist-serving political scam is being perpetrated. Why not come clean and admit it ?

Drummond

12-10-2016, 08:00 AM

really.

If I spent the time and effort Drummond did giving you a legitimate response jus to get a couple of 2-worders?

I'd be pissed and it's why I just quit engaging in circle jerks with assholes. Your argument sucks. If you don't like how the Earth turns we'll just stop it so you get off.

Other wise do you actually believe all us insects can alter the Universe? That mentality reeks od nothing but Man's arrogance. You are not the master of your destiny, nor this planet's. Get over it.

Thanks - but I'm not particularly pissed. I understand that Pete has his Leftie agenda to stick to. He can't give ground, even when 'bested' ... it's like the old analogy of someone tugging at a loose thread in a tapestry, only to make the entire tapestry unravel. Pete's need to rigidly stick to every bit of his propaganda, and to clam up when trounced, is no less than understandable. Since he's driven by dogmatism, he is also imprisoned by it .. unable to face any countering realities.

I almost feel sorry for him, Gunny. ALMOST.

Gunny

12-10-2016, 08:44 AM

Thanks - but I'm not particularly pissed. I understand that Pete has his Leftie agenda to stick to. He can't give ground, even when 'bested' ... it's like the old analogy of someone tugging at a loose thread in a tapestry, only to make the entire tapestry unravel. Pete's need to rigidly stick to every bit of his propaganda, and to clam up when trounced, is no less than understandable. Since he's driven by dogmatism, he is also imprisoned by it .. unable to face any countering realities.

I almost feel sorry for him, Gunny. ALMOST.

I feel more sorry for me and this new pc. His argument itself besides being wrong is his argument. I just can't stand the BS one line answers. And I don't mean simple one liners where they are merited. I mean chump ass "oh yeah?" responses to a thoughtful reply. Maybe I have a jaded opinion but it requires a LOT of effort for me to just say hi. It's taken 20 minutes for me to get these few lines out.

I don't need to waste them on a closed mind.

pete311

12-10-2016, 10:20 AM

Nope. You're peddling the bog standard 'we must clean up our act, save the planet, by cutting emissions' line ... whether directly or indirectly. What I've done is to show you that the argument is bogus.

Never said that directly or indirectly, stop lying.

If the global warming issue was truly our OWN fault - and ignoring all the other dips and rises there've been, over hundreds of millions of years (!!) - then scientists engaged on this problem would be pushing realistic remedies, not any bogus ones. Cutting emissions would only stem the rate at which pollution is added to. It does nothing to deal with what we're told is out there already, 'damaging our environment'.

Scientists report data, they aren't engineers or politicians. Get that fact straight. Yes and those past rises can be explained with other scientific reasons depending on what is happening on Earth at the time. This current record spike of C02 has no other explanation other than perfectly coinciding with human activity. You say there have been many rises and rips and you just stop there. No, there are reasons. They don't just rise and dip for fun. You either give me some reason for the record spike or you accept thousands of dedicated scientists data results.

I'll approach this in either of two ways.

1. I'll ask you once again. What is the REAL agenda here ??

Agenda with what? This thread or activists and politicians views with GW?

2. You might just cut to the chase, and admit that Tyr is correct when he says that a Leftist-serving political scam is being perpetrated. Why not come clean and admit it ?

You guys are so sappy, paranoid and dramatic. Scientists publish data, they don't push agendas. That is for activists and politicians. Being a good steward to the earth is not a radical idea unless the house you live in is trashed.

Gunny

12-10-2016, 10:58 AM

Never said that directly or indirectly, stop lying.

Scientists report data, they aren't engineers or politicians. Get that fact straight. Yes and those past rises can be explained with other scientific reasons depending on what is happening on Earth at the time. This current record spike of C02 has no other explanation other than perfectly coinciding with human activity. You say there have been many rises and rips and you just stop there. No, there are reasons. They don't just rise and dip for fun. You either give me some reason for the record spike or you accept thousands of dedicated scientists data results.

Agenda with what? This thread or activists and politicians views with GW?

You guys are so sappy, paranoid and dramatic. Scientists publish data, they don't push agendas. That is for activists and politicians. Being a good steward to the earth is not a radical idea unless the house you live in is trashed.

Where to start .... WE are the dramatic ones because we don't buy off on a bunch of contrived data? I'm sure as Hell not selling some Chicken Little crap because some guy getting paid to say it's so says it's so.

No one I've seen has suggested trashing your personal little Utopia. But the very idea that global warming is man made is absurd. It's not a logical concept. Those scientists you tout are getting paid a fortune to be right, So don't say there are no politics involved. People with a vested interest are raking in your tax dollars to come to a predetermined conclusion.

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 11:23 AM

Scientists publish data, they don't push agendas.

Want to take another swing at that?

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 11:30 AM

Luckily for us, Trump has chosen someone who doesn't believe in the crap about man causing global warming. Dummy Al Gore met with Trump and actually walked out thinking that he reached "common ground". Too bad it was like the next day that Trump chose Scott Pruitt to head the EPA, who is like 100% the opposite of Gore. :) :)

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 11:36 AM

Drummond

12-10-2016, 12:06 PM

I feel more sorry for me and this new pc. His argument itself besides being wrong is his argument. I just can't stand the BS one line answers. And I don't mean simple one liners where they are merited. I mean chump ass "oh yeah?" responses to a thoughtful reply. Maybe I have a jaded opinion but it requires a LOT of effort for me to just say hi. It's taken 20 minutes for me to get these few lines out.

I don't need to waste them on a closed mind.

Sorry to hear you're still having problems with your PC.

Pete is typical of his kind. When his arguments are taken apart, he cannot concede. So, he resorts to other stupidity.

That's all it is. No point even giving a 2 word answer from him, typed purely for effect, the time of day.

Drummond

12-10-2016, 12:18 PM

Never said that directly or indirectly, stop lying.

You deny that you agree with that propaganda ?? Oh, come on !!

Scientists report data, they aren't engineers or politicians. Get that fact straight. Yes and those past rises can be explained with other scientific reasons depending on what is happening on Earth at the time. This current record spike of C02 has no other explanation other than perfectly coinciding with human activity. You say there have been many rises and rips and you just stop there. No, there are reasons. They don't just rise and dip for fun. You either give me some reason for the record spike or you accept thousands of dedicated scientists data results.

Getting - conveniently - confused with context, Pete ?

The 'many rises and dips' cover periods WAY in excess of the time humanity has been living on Planet Earth, Pete. Whatever the cause(s), they CANNOT be man made.

What can be said is that they're cyclical. The planet recovers from a rise, or dip, to continue with the cycle again some other time. Yes ... life goes on.

Ah, but suddenly, during one of these cycle events, SUDDENLY, it's MAN'S fault. SUDDENLY, 'catastrophe looms' ! Why ? Because .... Lefties say so ?

I'm sure that if they had a way of doing it, they'd blame Mankind for ALL of the cycle events that have ever happened. Since they can't, they prefer to ignore them.

Agenda with what? This thread or activists and politicians views with GW?

The agenda which has to account for why the Left wing is trying so hard to push bogus arguments, and force industries and countries to scale down their industrial activities !

It's only a personal view, but I suggest that the Left has such a hatred for Capitalistic success that it's trying to find a new way of crippling it, and making it stick. That and an added bonus 'blame game' attack, thrown in for good measure. But you're more than welcome to prove me wrong, if in fact you can.

You guys are so sappy, paranoid and dramatic. Scientists publish data, they don't push agendas. That is for activists and politicians. Being a good steward to the earth is not a radical idea unless the house you live in is trashed.

But, the arguments put forward ARE BOGUS. I've shown you this. Still .. thanks for the insults. They help illustrate your awareness that you're losing the argument, Pete.

pete311

12-10-2016, 12:22 PM

Such an awesome choice!

Pruitt is going to clean house and the energy sector is going to boom.

This is all short sighted though. We are sacrificing out environment by reducing regulations. We will get a boost in jobs, but once the environment is wrecked then what? Of course, this may not happen for decades, but who cares about our childrens futures right?

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 12:23 PM

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 12:27 PM

pete311

12-10-2016, 12:32 PM

You deny that you agree with that propaganda ?? Oh, come on !!

I want to talk science and all you do is bring up agenda. What propaganda are you speaking of specifically?

The 'many rises and dips' cover periods WAY in excess of the time humanity has been living on Planet Earth, Pete. Whatever the cause(s), they CANNOT be man made.

Agreed, so what. The past rises and dips have scientific explanation's that don't require man. The last hundred years we have no explanation other than the meteoric rise of C02 that coincidentally follows human activity. If not by man, what has caused the record rise in C02. I'd love for you to tell me. You may win a nobel prize.

Ah, but suddenly, during one of these cycle events, SUDDENLY, it's MAN'S fault. SUDDENLY, 'catastrophe looms' ! Why ? Because .... Lefties say so ?

These cycle events? You say that like it's some law of nature. "The earth must go through cycles of temperature". There are reasons for dips and rises that can be scientifically studied. This current "cycle" as you want to cause it is due to record C02 from human activity.

The agenda which has to account for why the Left wing is trying so hard to push bogus arguments, and force industries and countries to scale down their industrial activities !

You really are neurotic. For one second separate the science from the politics. One second, please. One objectively shows what is happening, the other decides what to do about it. I don't care to discuss the latter.

It's only a personal view, but I suggest that the Left has such a hatred for Capitalistic success that it's trying to find a new way of crippling it, and making it stick. That and an added bonus 'blame game' attack, thrown in for good measure. But you're more than welcome to prove me wrong, if in fact you can.

More neurosis. I don't care about your opinion and paranoia.

pete311

12-10-2016, 12:33 PM

We're not sacrificing anything.

Your hysteria is unfounded.

What happens when you pollute the environment?

pete311

12-10-2016, 12:34 PM

You're assuming that the environment will be "wrecked", which is hilariously wrong. But carry on!

Have you seen the factory cities in china and india with glowing rivers? Have you been to cities where it's cloudy every day from smog? I have. It's not where I want to live.

Gunny

12-10-2016, 12:44 PM

This is all short sighted though. We are sacrificing out environment by reducing regulations. We will get a boost in jobs, but once the environment is wrecked then what? Of course, this may not happen for decades, but who cares about our childrens futures right?

So we should just stop breathing. Brilliant. So what's the end game? We can all be miserable paying for someone's pet quackery in the assumption that people will be alive in some future world and will give a crap what you believe now?

I live in the here and now. Short sighted? How about reality. I look out the window and LA LA Land STILL ain't there. In my little private shangra la my bills got to YOUR address.

pete311

12-10-2016, 12:47 PM

So we should just stop breathing. Brilliant. So what's the end game? We can all be miserable paying for someone's pet quackery in the assumption that people will be alive in some future world and will give a crap what you believe now?

I live in the here and now. Short sighted? How about reality. I look out the window and LA LA Land STILL ain't there. In my little private shangra la my bills got to YOUR address.

It's called innovation and not digging your head in the ground only looking out for yourself.

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 12:51 PM

What happens when you pollute the environment?

The largest polluting event in recent memory was done by the EPA itself.

Have you seen the factory cities in china and india with glowing rivers? Have you been to cities where it's cloudy every day from smog? I have. It's not where I want to live.

We are not India or China and your insinuation that we'd allow such things is amusing.

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 12:53 PM

Have you seen the factory cities in china and india with glowing rivers? Have you been to cities where it's cloudy every day from smog? I have. It's not where I want to live.

That's because they live like dogs and allow their companies to pollute as dogs. No one is saying that we should allow such companies to dump shit in rivers, to allow clouds of whatever the hell they want to come out of their rooftops. We already regulate a ton of that and should continue to do so.

But global warming, made by man, is a different story. Concentrate on the pollution efforts like stated above, not on hysteria about what comes out of my hair spray or a cows ass.

pete311

12-10-2016, 12:55 PM

We are not India or China and your insinuation that we'd allow such things is amusing.

Sure and no one thought 2008 financial crisis would happen when we eased regulations

pete311

12-10-2016, 12:59 PM

That's because they live like dogs and allow their companies to pollute as dogs. No one is saying that we should allow such companies to dump shit in rivers, to allow clouds of whatever the hell they want to come out of their rooftops. We already regulate a ton of that and should continue to do so.

But global warming, made by man, is a different story. Concentrate on the pollution efforts like stated above, not on hysteria about what comes out of my hair spray or a cows ass.

Do you know what regulations they want to ease? I am genuinely interested.

Actually we should worry about cows since "Agriculture is responsible for an estimated 14 percent of the world's greenhouse gases. A significant portion of these emissions come from methane, which, in terms of its contribution to global warming, is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. "

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 01:05 PM

Do you know what regulations they want to ease? I am genuinely interested.

Actually we should worry about cows since "Agriculture is responsible for an estimated 14 percent of the world's greenhouse gases. A significant portion of these emissions come from methane, which, in terms of its contribution to global warming, is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. "

They want to end every single regulation and work as hard as possible, to make us look like China as quick as humanly possible. Then once they achieve that, the goal is to use as many 'men' as possible to pollute our environment so badly, that the earth will cease to exist before another democrat ever has a chance of getting into office.

Kill all the cows.

Drummond

12-10-2016, 01:06 PM

I want to talk science and all you do is bring up agenda. What propaganda are you speaking of specifically?

Of course I'm talking about an agenda. There HAS to be one. For example, what notice have you taken of any of the arguments I've put forward ? WHY is the Left, specifically, so determined to foist blame on Mankind for something we KNOW happens to the planet in cycles ??

You're a Leftie. You must know why you peddle your stuff, immune to any reason that shows you you could be misguided.

Why not open up, and tell us ?

Agreed, so what. The past rises and dips have scientific explanation's that don't require man. The last hundred years we have no explanation other than the meteoric rise of C02 that coincidentally follows human activity. If not by man, what has caused the record rise in C02. I'd love for you to tell me. You may win a nobel prize.

What caused all the other historical rises in temperature ? Are you telling me you know, for a fact, that CO2 rises never occurred before now ?

These cycle events? You say that like it's some law of nature. "The earth must go through cycles of temperature". There are reasons for dips and rises that can be scientifically studied. This current "cycle" as you want to cause it is due to record C02 from human activity.

A natural event IS that, Pete.

This is tiresome. Uselessly so. You're totally centred on your 'blame game' tactics, and choose to ignore historic fact.

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 01:08 PM

Sure and no one thought 2008 financial crisis would happen when we eased regulations

Let's not introduce more Democrat fails into the picture.

One does not have anything to do with the other, except for the propensity of Democrats to pursue bad policy and inept management.

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 01:09 PM

Kill all the cows.

I pledge to eat 2 hamburgers today to do my part. :salute:

pete311

12-10-2016, 01:10 PM

Let's not introduce more Democrat fails into the picture.

One does not have anything to do with the other, except for the propensity of Democrats to pursue bad policy and inept management.

GW's admin eased the regulations that resulted in the crisis. Last time I checked, he was a repub.

pete311

12-10-2016, 01:12 PM

They want to end every single regulation and work as hard as possible, to make us look like China as quick as humanly possible. Then once they achieve that, the goal is to use as many 'men' as possible to pollute our environment so badly, that the earth will cease to exist before another democrat ever has a chance of getting into office.

Kill all the cows.
You don't know, that is why you result to humor. If you won't know, then how do you know it won't result in more pollution?

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 01:12 PM

Let's not introduce more Democrat fails into the picture.

One does not have anything to do with the other, except for the propensity of Democrats to pursue bad policy and inept management.

Funny, as he just tried to eat my babies a few times because I went off topic!! LOL

Gunny

12-10-2016, 01:13 PM

What happens when you pollute the environment?I usually call it pissin on a tree. But when I gotta go that oak is mighty handy.

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 01:16 PM

You don't know, that is why you result to humor. If you won't know, then how do you know it won't result in more pollution?

Or perhaps you're all over the map and I get tired of answering your absolutely useless questions sometimes. If you're asking me a question - and you already know the answer to it, and you're trying to play the little "gotcha" game, then you won't find me playing. So the question is "Do you know what regulations they want to ease? " - So how about you just make your point and ask a genuine question?

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 01:18 PM

GW's admin eased the regulations that resulted in the crisis. Last time I checked, he was a repub.

Wrong again, that ball is owned by you Democrats, as has already been established. But that's for another thread.

May I suggest the search function here on the board and educate yourself before falling on your sword again?

pete311

12-10-2016, 01:19 PM

Of course I'm talking about an agenda. There HAS to be one. For example, what notice have you taken of any of the arguments I've put forward ? WHY is the Left, specifically, so determined to foist blame on Mankind for something we KNOW happens to the planet in cycles ??

You're a Leftie. You must know why you peddle your stuff, immune to any reason that shows you you could be misguided.

Why not open up, and tell us ?

Wow you are weird dude. Do you think science is some leftist conspiracy? I don't think you understand the difference between science and politics. I am stunned.

What caused all the other historical rises in temperature ? Are you telling me you know, for a fact, that CO2 rises never occurred before now ?

Of course C02 has fluctuated is the past.
https://www.epa.gov/climate-change-science/causes-climate-change

This is tiresome. Uselessly so. You're totally centred on your 'blame game' tactics, and choose to ignore historic fact.

No shit, your armchair daydream analytics are a joke. You have these questions and for some reason refuse to do any real research.

pete311

12-10-2016, 01:20 PM

Or perhaps you're all over the map and I get tired of answering your absolutely useless questions sometimes. If you're asking me a question - and you already know the answer to it, and you're trying to play the little "gotcha" game, then you won't find me playing. So the question is "Do you know what regulations they want to ease? " - So how about you just make your point and ask a genuine question?

You said they won't do anything to pollute the enviroment and yet you can't say what regulations they want to ease.

Gunny

12-10-2016, 01:23 PM

The largest polluting event in recent memory was done by the EPA itself.

We are not India or China and your insinuation that we'd allow such things is amusing.So spending billions of my tax dollars on a dream is innovation? I call it wasting my money to keep some worthless bureaucrat employed'

There is nothing innovative about pointless.

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 01:24 PM

pete311

12-10-2016, 01:25 PM

So spending billions of my tax dollars on a dream is innovation? I call it wasting my money to keep some worthless bureaucrat employed'

There is nothing innovative about pointless.

Gunny, you do realize we are past peak oil production right? Current rates of production, oil will run out in 53 years, natural gas in 54, and coal in 110. Yeah I know you'll be dead, but for fucks sake care about the next generation.

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 01:29 PM

You said they won't do anything to pollute the enviroment and yet you can't say what regulations they want to ease.

I'm pretty confident that I know. I'm pretty confident that any idiot can search google and get such answers. I'm also pretty confident that I explained already why you aren't seeing an answer from me. So, again, would you like to state these regulations and actually ask a question?

pete311

12-10-2016, 01:33 PM

I'm pretty confident that I know. I'm pretty confident that any idiot can search google and get such answers. I'm also pretty confident that I explained already why you aren't seeing an answer from me. So, again, would you like to state these regulations and actually ask a question?
This is chicken shit Jim, you know it. You can say "idiot can search google and get such answers" for every thread on this forum" Yes you only said it to me when you want to be difficult. NT, Gunny and Drummond ask all kinds of dumbass claims and questions that they can Google easily and you don't bust their balls. You play favorites because their on your team.

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 01:36 PM

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 01:41 PM

This is chicken shit Jim, you know it. You can say "idiot can search google and get such answers" for every thread on this forum" Yes you only said it to me when you want to be difficult. NT, Gunny and Drummond ask all kinds of dumbass claims and questions that they can Google easily and you don't bust their balls. You play favorites because their on your team.

Be 100% honest with me - you're asking about what regulations that may be eased - you have no idea? I KNOW you know what you're asking. So why ask me? Why not present what is supposedly being eased, then ask your question.

Or perhaps there IS NOTHING being eased.

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 01:51 PM

NT, Gunny and Drummond ask all kinds of dumbass claims and questions that they can Google easily and you don't bust their balls. You play favorites because their on your team.

No, Petey.

All of us know that what was said is fact, because this is not the first 50 times the subject has come up and we're all aware of the facts.

When a new eco-moonbat arrives and begins spouting off all the same soundbites that have been disproven ad nauseam, there isn't much interest to regurgitate the same argument.

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 02:09 PM

NT, Gunny and Drummond ask all kinds of dumbass claims and questions that they can Google easily and you don't bust their balls. You play favorites because their on your team.

No Pete.

You asked me a question, one you already know the answer to. THAT is the only issue. I respond in the same manner with ANYONE, which is to not answer said question. Difference is, those guys aren't asking me any questions, nor continuing to ask me the same question, even though I explained several times why I wasn't answering.

But - let's forget all of that. I'll go back to the beginning and just answer your question and put this to bed. The question you asked:

"Do you know what regulations they want to ease? "

There are none that they plan on easing, and no one has made such a claim.

pete311

12-10-2016, 02:18 PM

Peak production? Are you nuts? We're sitting on more oil that Saudi is with the new fracking technology.

And as far as your reliable liberal hysteria about running out of oil, that was supposed to happen back in the late '70s / early 80's. Then the '90s. Then the '00s.

Really, you liberals screaming about 'The End is Nigh!" has worn itself out. No one believes that crap, if anyone ever really did.

We as in the world. So fossil fuels are infinate? That is your stance?

pete311

12-10-2016, 02:19 PM

Be 100% honest with me - you're asking about what regulations that may be eased - you have no idea? I KNOW you know what you're asking. So why ask me? Why not present what is supposedly being eased, then ask your question.

Or perhaps there IS NOTHING being eased.

No I don't know what regulations will be eased. Didn't know it was common knowledge.

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 02:22 PM

No I don't know what regulations will be eased. Didn't know it was common knowledge.

Well, don't worry about it then, because there won't be any.

pete311

12-10-2016, 02:23 PM

There are none that they plan on easing, and no one has made such a claim.
http://time.com/4349309/donald-trump-bismarck-energy-speech/

aboutime

12-10-2016, 02:25 PM

I find it very comical the way pete comes here, drops all of his liberal idea's, but never, ever bothers to answer questions; and instead...instantly goes to another topic to do the exact same thing...and STILL never bothering to answer any question without another question?

Pete. Democrats Lost across the board. Hillary lost, and Obama was Lost the day he arrived in Washington. Did you give him directions too?

pete311

12-10-2016, 02:27 PM

abouttime you are now on my ignore list, I will not see your posts

aboutime

12-10-2016, 02:30 PM

abouttime you are now on my ignore list, I will not see your posts

GREAT NEWS. Typical of those who can't stand TRUTH.

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 02:37 PM

http://time.com/4349309/donald-trump-bismarck-energy-speech/

THANK YOU - finally!! I rest my case. I told you from my very first post that I knew you had something in mind, and weren't blindly asking, and that's why I didn't answer. I told you to simply post any of these regulations, and to ask a question, and you refused and played dumb.

And we come full circle and here it is, just as I KNEW from the get go. So ALL of this time was wasted when you could have simply posted this and asked a question about it from the get go. But nope, you wanted to play gotcha... that's EXACTLY why I simply said nothing was being eased, which is what you wanted, so that you could quickly post this and play "gotcha". It failed Pete. I knew your game from the first time you asked. How lame.

pete311

12-10-2016, 02:45 PM

This is a waste of my time. I'm not here to play games.

Drummond

12-10-2016, 02:48 PM

Wow you are weird dude. Do you think science is some leftist conspiracy? I don't think you understand the difference between science and politics. I am stunned.

Very funny.

'Science' in this case is your CLAIM that Mankind is responsible for the current CYCLE of global warming. Nobody can conclusively prove any such thing .. but you still peddle this stuff nonetheless.

Science is concerned with FACT .. or I thought it was.

Of course C02 has fluctuated is the past.

There you go, then.

No shit, your armchair daydream analytics are a joke. You have these questions and for some reason refuse to do any real research.

Correction. For example, you have been shown that CO2 levels are less absorbable by the world's oceans .. it took a bit of research on my part to find that out. Research you HAD NOT DONE yourself.

Just asserting a politically expedient message as though it were fact ... is not research. Nor is it 'science'. It's just propaganda.

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 02:49 PM

This is a waste of my time. I'm not here to play games.

Ok, fair enough. But humor me - isn't that what you just did? Why did you continue to badger me for an answer, when I told you I knew exactly what you were doing, and that you DID in fact know of regulations being eased?

And now that you actually do point just that out, and exactly what I said was true - you seem to be angry. Why? Because I knew all along that you knew about the regulations?

Would you agree - that if you posted that link from the get go - that we WOULDN'T have wasted time? YOU wasted YOUR OWN TIME.

Drummond

12-10-2016, 02:50 PM

This is a waste of my time. I'm not here to play games.

Yes, it is a waste of your time. You're following your agenda. And yes, I know you're not here to play games - rather, to peddle a politically correct message, which we 'must believe in', because Lefties tell us it's so ... !!

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 02:53 PM

We as in the world. So fossil fuels are infinate? That is your stance?

Let's see your sources for running out of oil in 53 years and 54 for Natural Gas, and 110 for Coal.

I feel a chuckle-fest coming on.

pete311

12-10-2016, 03:04 PM

Yes, it is a waste of your time. You're following your agenda. And yes, I know you're not here to play games - rather, to peddle a politically correct message, which we 'must believe in', because Lefties tell us it's so ... !!

You are now on my ignore list, bye bye

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 03:07 PM

You are now on my ignore list, bye bye

Is this Emergency Procedures when your bubble is about to be breached?

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 03:18 PM

You are now on my ignore list, bye bye

I'm not getting involved and my description refers to no one...

Due, WTF? People are assholes. How did you ever survive USMB for one single day? Sometimes you will have perfect conversations, sometimes it will be abrasive. And no offense, but take a peek, you're not always peaches and cream. But give folks a break man. Post with them on the good days and accept folks when it's a bad day or things you disagree with. Putting someone on ignore that you have a long running feud with is one thing, but seems like you are picking folks off like you're Clint Eastwood!! Enjoy some of the feuding, physically ignore the crap you don't like, look for the decent stuff out there. But pretty soon all you're going to see is the header at the top of the site! LOL I know you want to place me on ignore badly, but here I am asking you to simply take a breather man, un-ignore people and take a step back. Don't jump man!! :) Seriously, we give you a lot of shit here, and yet here you are. We like you secretly :)

aboutime

12-10-2016, 03:34 PM

This is a waste of my time. I'm not here to play games.

I'm watching the ARMY-NAVY game, and NOBODY there took the football, and went home because they felt ignored. The only time you are wasting pete, is yours. Everybody else is having a great day, looking forward to making AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.

Cheer up.

pete311

12-10-2016, 03:53 PM

I'm not getting involved and my description refers to no one...

Due, WTF? People are assholes. How did you ever survive USMB for one single day? Sometimes you will have perfect conversations, sometimes it will be abrasive. And no offense, but take a peek, you're not always peaches and cream. But give folks a break man. Post with them on the good days and accept folks when it's a bad day or things you disagree with. Putting someone on ignore that you have a long running feud with is one thing, but seems like you are picking folks off like you're Clint Eastwood!! Enjoy some of the feuding, physically ignore the crap you don't like, look for the decent stuff out there. But pretty soon all you're going to see is the header at the top of the site! LOL I know you want to place me on ignore badly, but here I am asking you to simply take a breather man, un-ignore people and take a step back. Don't jump man!! :) Seriously, we give you a lot of shit here, and yet here you are. We like you secretly :)

I'm here to debate in good faith and for honest understanding. Many are not here for that. I'm too busy to waste my spinning wheels with people who either clealy have a mental illness or really are just stubborn assholes. I don't have time for that. I'm hear to learn how people different than me think. But I don't have time to debate with people so damaged that they have the physical inability to ever concede any preconcieved notion they have. Facts mean nothing if you are paranoid and think everything is a conspiracy. Debating with someone like that is a dead waste of time. btw, I can't ignore NT anyway, he's an admin or mod. I'm supposed to be getting ready for my wifes birthday/holiday party at my house. Some 45 are coming in an hour. :D

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 03:55 PM

btw, I can't ignore NT anyway, he's an admin or mod.

Did you try Alt+F4?

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 04:00 PM

I'm here to debate in good faith and for honest understanding. Many are not here for that. I'm too busy to waste my spinning wheels with people who either clealy have a mental illness or really are just stubborn assholes. I don't have time for that. I'm hear to learn how people different than me think. But I don't have time to debate with people so damaged that they have the physical inability to ever concede any preconcieved notion they have. Facts mean nothing if you are paranoid and think everything is a conspiracy. Debating with someone like that is a dead waste of time. btw, I can't ignore NT anyway, he's an admin or mod. I'm supposed to be getting ready for my wifes birthday/holiday party at my house. Some 45 are coming in an hour. :D

And yet people are human, as you are. All those things you are seeking here can be found, just not in every thread and every post. We ain't perfect here, in case you haven't noticed yet! But damn, not everyone is going to fit into a little fish bowl and be what you want. For example, sometimes I would like to find a way to reach through my cat-5 cable and punch you in the face. But I realize that this isn't going to happen. So I either tell you to eff off, I beat you to death with facts, or I just shake my head and move on. Sometimes it's you and sometimes it's me. But damn, place everyone on ignore and pretty soon it will just be you and the spammers that come like once every few months. :)

jimnyc

12-10-2016, 04:01 PM

Did you try Alt+F4?

I'm pretty confident that you're supposed to do Ctrl+Alt+F4

NightTrain

12-10-2016, 04:10 PM

I'm pretty confident that you're supposed to do Ctrl+Alt+F4

That works, too. Gives you more options as well.

Drummond

12-11-2016, 04:17 AM

You are now on my ignore list, bye bye

Whoopee !! :hyper::hyper::joy4:

-- Typical, eh ? When faced with a reality you just can't discredit, and someone threatening your precious propaganda, what do you do ? RUN AWAY from it all ...... :laugh::laugh:

Goodbye, then, Pete. I'm truly sorry that you couldn't debate with an open mind, but then, this is no surprise to me. In the absence of enlightenment ... enjoy your delusions, my son. :tinfoil:

Drummond

12-11-2016, 04:26 AM

Is this Emergency Procedures when your bubble is about to be breached?

I believe that's exactly it. I've seen this time and again with those from the Left. Left-wingers can never acknowledge when they're wrong, or have been 'bested', to any degree at all. If they do, then they threaten the propagandist edifice they depend upon to sustain them. This would never do - of course.

Better to ignore the threat to it, or even to run away from it. Sadly, Pete is apparently intent upon choosing such escapism.

I'd have much preferred honest discussion, where points are weighed for their merits. In this way, Pete might have learned something. But he prefers to run, instead.

Well, it's his choice, and perhaps - I mean this genuinely - a bit of a sad one at that (?). So be it.

Drummond

12-11-2016, 04:38 AM

GREAT NEWS. Typical of those who can't stand TRUTH.

I've said the same thing. You've just said it a whole lot better ! ... :clap:

NightTrain

12-11-2016, 01:45 PM

Gunny, you do realize we are past peak oil production right? Current rates of production, oil will run out in 53 years, natural gas in 54, and coal in 110. Yeah I know you'll be dead, but for fucks sake care about the next generation.

Peak production? Are you nuts? We're sitting on more oil that Saudi is with the new fracking technology.

And as far as your reliable liberal hysteria about running out of oil, that was supposed to happen back in the late '70s / early 80's. Then the '90s. Then the '00s.

Really, you liberals screaming about 'The End is Nigh!" has worn itself out. No one believes that crap, if anyone ever really did.

We as in the world. So fossil fuels are infinate? That is your stance?

Let's see your sources for running out of oil in 53 years and 54 for Natural Gas, and 110 for Coal.

I feel a chuckle-fest coming on.
pete311

Hello, Petey? Where's the beef?

Don't be skeered, little fella. We'll get to the bottom of this.

pete311

12-11-2016, 02:58 PM

@pete311 (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1821)

Hello, Petey? Where's the beef?

Don't be skeered, little fella. We'll get to the bottom of this.

Coal 113 years
https://knoema.com/smsfgud/bp-world-reserves-of-fossil-fuels

Natural Gas 84 years
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=58&t=8

Oil 53 years
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/06/28/the-world-was-533-years-of-oil-left/11528999/

NightTrain

12-11-2016, 03:15 PM

Coal 113 years
https://knoema.com/smsfgud/bp-world-reserves-of-fossil-fuels

Natural Gas 84 years
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=58&t=8

Oil 53 years
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/06/28/the-world-was-533-years-of-oil-left/11528999/

Read your own links, then read up from BP directly and let's see if you can recognize what you're missing :

http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/coal/coal-reserves.html

http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/natural-gas/natural-gas-reserves.html

http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/oil.html

pete311

12-11-2016, 03:55 PM

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

12-11-2016, 04:11 PM

GW's admin eased the regulations that resulted in the crisis. Last time I checked, he was a repub.

What crisis was there before those regulations were installed by the libs/socialists/dems?
Care to date it and explain exactly what it was, by giving facts and actual proof?----Tyr

NightTrain

12-11-2016, 04:27 PM

Tell me, I got football to watch

It'll wait. This will be educational for you.

aboutime

12-11-2016, 04:35 PM

petey is now using the "I GOT FOOTBALL TO WATCH" excuse to avoid being presented with, or discussing TRUTH that he knows...he cannot dispute.

pete. If we call you a lefty today. Does that also equate to the liberal word RACIST all of you use so often whenever confronted with TRUTH?

pete311

12-11-2016, 05:09 PM

What crisis was there before those regulations were installed by the libs/socialists/dems?
Care to date it and explain exactly what it was, by giving facts and actual proof?----Tyr
You don't wait for a crisis

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

12-11-2016, 05:33 PM

You don't wait for a crisis

Prudent preemptive actions demands that the problem to be addressed by correct identification and studied well before any wise action be taken.
Its not prudent to cry as a fact something that ''computer models" (even if they are not bias-loaded with the programmer's desired conclusion data) predict-- "MAY OCCUR"....
A supposed scientific fact that is altered and managed to fit a political agenda does not quality as a fact, as reality.-Tyr

jimnyc

12-11-2016, 05:34 PM

It'll wait. This will be educational for you.

I'll be curious to read as well.

aboutime

12-11-2016, 06:16 PM

You don't wait for a crisis

pete. In one sense, you may be right. But why allow democrats to determine what they call a crisis, or not? We have allowed our phony liberal president to determine what is, or isn't a crisis...namely, when he called ISIS the Junior Varsity, and also when he refused to name the actual enemy by name...ISLAMIC TERRORISTS.

So. If you are one who determines what is, or isn't a crisis...YOU GET A HILLARY.

In fact. I'd be willing to bet, you would echo Obama and try to declare that GLOBAL WARMING is more dangerous for us in our lives than ANY THREATS FROM ISIS?

pete311

03-16-2017, 01:53 PM

Read your own links, then read up from BP directly and let's see if you can recognize what you're missing :

http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/coal/coal-reserves.html

http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/natural-gas/natural-gas-reserves.html

http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/oil.html

Coal was spot on, gas less, oil doesn't say. One thing I will be clear on is there is a big difference in how much are in proven tapped reserves, how many are in technically feasible (not necessarily financially) reserves and how much is there is total in the planet.

Gunny

03-16-2017, 02:59 PM

Have you seen the factory cities in china and india with glowing rivers? Have you been to cities where it's cloudy every day from smog? I have. It's not where I want to live.

As a matter of fact .... yep.

NightTrain

03-16-2017, 04:43 PM

Coal was spot on, gas less, oil doesn't say. One thing I will be clear on is there is a big difference in how much are in proven tapped reserves, how many are in technically feasible (not necessarily financially) reserves and how much is there is total in the planet.

Read up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11971280/The-Earth-is-not-running-out-of-oil-and-gas-BP-says.html

Gunny

03-16-2017, 05:06 PM

Read up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11971280/The-Earth-is-not-running-out-of-oil-and-gas-BP-says.html

He IS correct about the other countries. But let's call it what it is ... Man-made POLLUTION. Minus Japan, Asia is nasty. It is polluting the globe, not causing it to warm up. Global Warming is just another red herring.

pete311

03-16-2017, 05:20 PM

pete311

03-16-2017, 05:21 PM

He IS correct about the other countries. But let's call it what it is ... Man-made POLLUTION. Minus Japan, Asia is nasty. It is polluting the globe, not causing it to warm up. Global Warming is just another red herring.

Why do you think this? What do you think is causing the warming?

Gunny

03-16-2017, 05:30 PM

Why do you think this? What do you think is causing the warming?

A cyclical climate cjange in this pingo pong ball we live on in a universe full of paddles. You DO realize the Earth has actually rotated on its axis? You think some politically BS is going to stop THAT? Or how about the meteor that struck the Earth and caused most of life to die? Think Bruce Willis is going to hop in his spaceship and shoot it down?

Or maybe you think as stars get older they get cooler? You live in a shooting gallery you can't control. Get over it.

Gunny

03-16-2017, 05:36 PM

A cyclical climate cjange in this pingo pong ball we live on in a universe full of paddles. You DO realize the Earth has actually rotated on its axis? You think some politically BS is going to stop THAT? Or how about the meteor that struck the Earth and caused most of life to die? Think Bruce Willis is going to hop in his spaceship and shoot it down?

Or maybe you think as stars get older they get cooler? You live in a shooting gallery you can't control. Get over it.

Oh. and I am totally against polluting the environment for no reason. I AM for using our natural resources responsibly. We;ve got a lot of natural resources just sitting there while the rest of the world doesn't give a crap is doing what it wants and laughing at us. We are NOT the world and we do NOT set an example for anyone. They laugh behind our backs for being idealistic idiots.

pete311

03-16-2017, 05:39 PM

A cyclical climate cjange in this pingo pong ball we live on in a universe full of paddles

Why do you think the change we see is normal "cyclical change"? There is nothing humans can ever do to affect our core environment?

BoogyMan

03-16-2017, 05:54 PM

A cyclical climate cjange in this pingo pong ball we live on in a universe full of paddles. You DO realize the Earth has actually rotated on its axis? You think some politically BS is going to stop THAT? Or how about the meteor that struck the Earth and caused most of life to die? Think Bruce Willis is going to hop in his spaceship and shoot it down?

Or maybe you think as stars get older they get cooler? You live in a shooting gallery you can't control. Get over it.

With climate records only going back a little over 100 years Petie has nothing solid upon which to stand. His position is little more than a religion of political propaganda designed to bolster a position to empower the left and do damage to free markets.

NightTrain

03-16-2017, 06:03 PM

I'd trust an independent source more, otherwise cigs don't cause cancer either.

It was you that sourced BP in your argument. :smoke:

Now you don't like BP?

Gunny

03-16-2017, 06:08 PM

Why do you think the change we see is normal "cyclical change"? There is nothing humans can ever do to affect our core environment?

Re-read my posts. We live on a planet in a pinball gallery. Humans can affect pollution. You can't affect the former. So no, we cannot affect the universe. That is arrogance thinking we can. We don't control this planet. We occupy it. Thinking otherwise is a waste of time.

pete311

03-16-2017, 06:25 PM

With climate records only going back a little over 100 years Petie has nothing solid upon which to stand. His position is little more than a religion of political propaganda designed to bolster a position to empower the left and do damage to free markets.

Why do you think we only have 100 years of records?

pete311

03-16-2017, 06:26 PM

Re-read my posts. We live on a planet in a pinball gallery. Humans can affect pollution. You can't affect the former. So no, we cannot affect the universe. That is arrogance thinking we can. We don't control this planet. We occupy it. Thinking otherwise is a waste of time.

So your stance is that pollution does not affect the planet?

Elessar

03-16-2017, 06:43 PM

As a matter of fact .... yep.

San Bernardino, Stockton, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Long Beach....all in CA. In fact all through the
Central Valley up the I-5 or SR 99.

Little-Acorn

03-16-2017, 06:45 PM

Actually, we are currently in a period of global warming. Such periods have recurred regularly over the history of the planet.

http://www.climatedata.info/proxies/ice-cores/files/stacks_image_9599.png

(Source: http://www.climatedata.info/proxies/ice-cores/files/stacks_image_9599.png )

The last such period of warming, occurred approx. 130,000 years ago. And it was worse than the one we're in now.

The one before that was approx. 200,000 years ago. And before that, 250,000 years ago.

Not much around back then, except maybe some dinosaurs and cave men.

Maybe we need to go back in time, and tell those pesky cave men to quit driving their prehistoric SUVs, motorhomes, and diesel trucks. And can anybody even guess how much methane is released by a typical fart from a brontosaurus? It must be a huge amount. I ask you!

Yes, clearly these periods of global warming are caused by living beings. There is just as much evidence to support that theory back then, as there is for today.

I'm convinced, how about you?

pete311

03-16-2017, 06:47 PM

Maybe we need to go back in time, and tell those pesky cave men to quit driving their prehistoric SUVs, motorhomes, and diesel trucks. And can anybody even guess how much methane is released by a typical fart from a brontosaurus? It must be a huge amount. I ask you!

Yes, clearly these periods of global warming are caused by living beings. There is just as much evidence to support that theory back then, as there is for today.

There are reasons for those warming periods. Do you know the past reasons? What is the reason this time around?

Gunny

03-16-2017, 06:51 PM

So your stance is that pollution does not affect the planet?

Not my stance at all. It affects our environment. It does not affect the planet itself. You got this black or white, either or attitude. I'm totally against people polluting sh*t up. I'm also totally against creating red herrings red making a fortune off of them. How much money has been made by politicians and the media on this crap? Look ... YOU believe the Chicken Little BS.

I always wanted to be a weatherman. It might rain, it might not. It might be cold, but maybe not. I'd love to get paid to just guess at BS. Same principle apples. Y'all will walk outside in your rubbers and slippers on a sunny day because someone told you so.

Think for yourself.

Elessar

03-16-2017, 07:00 PM

There are reasons for those warming periods. Do you know the past reasons? What is the reason this time around?

Let's look at the simplistic reasons. Global evolution. Why do you think there is so much oil under the sand
in the Middle East? Used to be forested there....It did not just magically appear. Continental drift, too. Alaska
has lots of it under the tundra. So do Canada and Russia.

aboutime

03-16-2017, 08:23 PM

There are reasons for those warming periods. Do you know the past reasons? What is the reason this time around?

Are you really that DENSE petey? The Earth has a northern hemisphere, and a southern hemisphere. Every year, the entire Earth has FOUR seasons. Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter.

Those four seasons occur in each hemisphere..EVERY YEAR.

Some of the 12 months, depending on which hemisphere you happen to be in..ARE COLD, COOL, WARM, and HOT. (FOUR SEASONS).

Man, and Woman have NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW THE EARTH leans toward, or away from the SUN...Our Star, where the TEMPERATURES of our EARTH begin.

If there is such a thing as GLOBAL WARMING, or GLOBAL COOLING. IT IS BECAUSE the Earth is going around the SUN every 364-or-5 days each year.

So...unless AL GORE also Invented the EARTH.
MAN is not responsible for anything the EARTH does. EVER.

pete311

03-16-2017, 09:38 PM

Not my stance at all. It affects our environment. It does not affect the planet itself.
The environment is not part of the planet? Climate is not part of our environment?

pete311

03-16-2017, 09:39 PM

Let's look at the simplistic reasons. Global evolution.

I don't know what global evolution means. Is that a scientific term with research or something you just made up?

pete311

03-16-2017, 09:41 PM

MAN is not responsible for anything the EARTH does. EVER.

So if the world launches all nukes nothing would happen to the earth? Everything as normal? No nuclear winter? Another day at the park?

aboutime

03-16-2017, 09:50 PM

So if the world launches all nukes nothing would happen to the earth? Everything as normal? No nuclear winter? Another day at the park?

More of your stupidity. But, I will leave the answer to you. You come back here after that Hypothetical takes place, and tell us about YOUR DAY IN THE PARK.

NightTrain

03-17-2017, 09:02 AM

Read up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11971280/The-Earth-is-not-running-out-of-oil-and-gas-BP-says.html

I'd trust an independent source more, otherwise cigs don't cause cancer either.

It was you that sourced BP in your argument. :smoke:

Now you don't like BP?
pete311

Well, which is it, Petey?

Do you, or do you not like BP as a source?

NightTrain

03-17-2017, 09:35 AM

Why do you think this? What do you think is causing the warming?

This is due to that big glowy thing in the sky, combined with the wobble of our planet. It's why our planet warms and cools naturally since time immemorial.

Similarly, a slight warming has been dectected on Mars, as well : http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/31/mars-also-undergoing-climate-change-ice-age-retrea/

Not even the most rabid of moonbats can possibly argue that humans are affecting the climate on Mars. Right?

Gunny

03-17-2017, 09:42 AM

The environment is not part of the planet? Climate is not part of our environment?

DOn't try playing word games with me. You WILL lose. The topic global warming. Man polluting the environment is separate. The latter does not create the former. You try cherrypicking words on ME and you're going to have a bad day.

There used to not be humans on this planet. This planet has survived meteor strikes equal to any nuclear holocaust. And life came back. It's STILL here. Life is still here. You aren't trying to save anything but your own ass and your misdirected idealism. Not to mention your arrogance believe you can control the universe.

Change is change. You adapt to it as it comes. Your argument when cut to the base says Man can stop the world from turning if we want to. I don't understand the arrogance nor the fear. Both are REALLY tired ideas with me.

pete311

03-17-2017, 10:01 AM

DOn't try playing word games with me. You WILL lose. The topic global warming. Man polluting the environment is separate. The latter does not create the former.

So your stance is that burning fossil fuels does not create C02? Or that C02 is not a factor in global warming?

pete311

03-17-2017, 10:04 AM

This is due to that big glowy thing in the sky, combined with the wobble of our planet. It's why our planet warms and cools naturally since time immemorial.

Similarly, a slight warming has been dectected on Mars, as well : http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/31/mars-also-undergoing-climate-change-ice-age-retrea/

Not even the most rabid of moonbats can possibly argue that humans are affecting the climate on Mars. Right?

So your opinion is that all possible variations of temperature fluctuation is due to the sun and our planets wobble? No other possible options? The composition of our atmosphere makes no difference? I don't understand the mars reference. Why would humans be responsible for mars climate?

pete311

03-17-2017, 10:06 AM

@pete311 (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1821)

Well, which is it, Petey?

Do you, or do you not like BP as a source?

I'll accept it short of another source

Gunny

03-17-2017, 10:20 AM

So your stance is that burning fossil fuels does not create C02? Or that C02 is not a factor in global warming?

I didn't say that. What I WILL say is YOU breathing creates C02. Guess we need to get rid of you, huh?

pete311

03-17-2017, 10:42 AM

I didn't say that. What I WILL say is YOU breathing creates C02. Guess we need to get rid of you, huh?

Why turn hostile? I'm just asking questions. You are not being consistent. I really don't understand your stance. If C02 is a pollutant that contributes to global warming then how can you say man's polluting of the environment does not affect global warming.

BoogyMan

03-17-2017, 10:45 AM

Why do you think we only have 100 years of records?

Structured instrument-based record keeping, in our hemisphere, of climate data BEGAN between the late 1800s and 1914.

pete311

03-17-2017, 10:52 AM

Structured instrument-based record keeping, in our hemisphere, of climate data BEGAN between the late 1800s and 1914.
That is the only way to get climate data?

BoogyMan

03-17-2017, 11:05 AM

That is the only way to get climate data?

It is the ONLY way to get consistent and trustworthy data. Did you finish high school? Methods matter. As an engineer I spend a great deal of time working on gathering statistically significant data, not someone's subjective assessment that shows implicit data bias. You don't have much to stand on here.

Gunny

03-17-2017, 11:11 AM

Why turn hostile? I'm just asking questions. You are not being consistent. I really don't understand your stance. If C02 is a pollutant that contributes to global warming then how can you say man's polluting of the environment does not affect global warming.

Nothing hostile in my comment. It's YOUR perception of a smartass remark. When I get hostile, everybody knows it. I don't take prisoners and I've been banned from here and a couple other places for it.

Here's a tip for you, Pete ... learn to know the people you're dealing with. You lost a board because you couldn't see that we are all different people. I'm a total smartass and a retied Marine who was a Drill Instructor. If I wanted to REALLY get in your a$$, I'm rather talented at it. Most everyone on this board can tell when I get pissed. Most stay away and others have a few words in the background for me you don't see.

Know your audience. "

You don't my stance because you don't listen. It's posted a few posts back. I believe in using our natural resources RESPONSIBBLY. I'm against pointless pollution. I recycle. I don't throw things out my truck window.

But there's a greater good. Instead of looking at everything in black n white why don't you try getting some different hues of color? You also need to learn the Serenity Prayer. The part where it says " help me to change the things I can, and know the things I can't."

pete311

03-17-2017, 11:22 AM

It is the ONLY way to get consistent and trustworthy data. Did you finish high school? Methods matter. As an engineer I spend a great deal of time working on gathering statistically significant data, not someone's subjective assessment that shows implicit data bias. You don't have much to stand on here.

You are free to your own opinion but litereraly tens of thousands of PhDs in their respective relevant fields disagree
https://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/faq/how-do-we-determine-past-climate

pete311

03-17-2017, 11:23 AM

Nothing hostile in my comment. It's YOUR perception of a smartass remark. When I get hostile, everybody knows it. I don't take prisoners and I've been banned from here and a couple other places for it.

Here's a tip for you, Pete ... learn to know the people you're dealing with. You lost a board because you couldn't see that we are all different people. I'm a total smartass and a retied Marine who was a Drill Instructor. If I wanted to REALLY get in your a$$, I'm rather talented at it. Most everyone on this board can tell when I get pissed. Most stay away and others have a few words in the background for me you don't see.

Know your audience. "

You don't my stance because you don't listen. It's posted a few posts back. I believe in using our natural resources RESPONSIBBLY. I'm against pointless pollution. I recycle. I don't throw things out my truck window.

But there's a greater good. Instead of looking at everything in black n white why don't you try getting some different hues of color? You also need to learn the Serenity Prayer. The part where it says " help me to change the things I can, and know the things I can't."

None of this responds to my post

NightTrain

03-17-2017, 11:35 AM

So your opinion is that all possible variations of temperature fluctuation is due to the sun and our planets wobble? No other possible options? The composition of our atmosphere makes no difference? I don't understand the mars reference. Why would humans be responsible for mars climate?

Exactly.

The answer is that solar output from our star is warming Mars. Just as it's warming Earth.

See how both planets are being affected by the same source with the same results?

I'll accept it short of another source

I thought it was weird that you'd reject the same source you used.

Now that it's settled, I think we can agree that we're not going to run out of oil in 50 years. In fact, it's pointing to double the available oil in 30 years - and with new technology being developed, I'd guess that we're going to have at least triple the available oil in 60 years.

The sky is not falling, and we're not about to ignite.

pete311

03-17-2017, 11:49 AM

Exactly.

The answer is that solar output from our star is warming Mars. Just as it's warming Earth.

See how both planets are being affected by the same source with the same results?

You make it sound so simple. Anyone can be an astrophysicist or climatologist in a few short seconds apparently. It's not hard to understand that the composition of our atmosphere affects how the solar energy behaves.

Now that it's settled, I think we can agree that we're not going to run out of oil in 50 years. In fact, it's pointing to double the available oil in 30 years - and with new technology being developed, I'd guess that we're going to have at least triple the available oil in 60 years.

The sky is not falling, and we're not about to ignite.

Yes we will not run out of oil in 50 years

BoogyMan

03-17-2017, 11:51 AM

You are free to your own opinion but litereraly tens of thousands of PhDs in their respective relevant fields disagree
https://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/faq/how-do-we-determine-past-climate

This group freely admits they use anecdotal "evidence" to support their claims. Do you know what anecdotal means? They will tell you right up front that they are making what equates to an educated guess based on how they interpret what is in front of them. Dispassion with regard to science is what makes good science. You are simply desperate to make a claim that no science oriented individual will make. Scientists theorize, you politicize, and there is a great gulf of assumption in between.

Gunny

03-17-2017, 11:55 AM

You are free to your own opinion but litereraly tens of thousands of PhDs in their respective relevant fields disagree
https://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/faq/how-do-we-determine-past-climate

PhD's in WHAT? Man-made constructs? THERE lies your "man-made". You just ain't getting it. These people are paid to come to the conclusion the people paying them want them to. Hell, give ME a grant. I'll try to figure out why snails are slow and slimy. And I'm going to make sure I spend every dime explaining why there are no results so I can get another grant.

It cracks me up you people buy off on paying for these quacks that're just soaking up money at your expense. And the taxpayer's. We could pay off the deficit not paying for these junk science programs.

"We can stop the Earth from getting warmer". Wal-Mart don't sell that many fans.

pete311

03-17-2017, 11:55 AM

This group freely admits they use anecdotal "evidence" to support their claims.

How do you know this?

Scientists theorize, you politicize, and there is a great gulf of assumption in between.

What policies have I advocated for? I've said nothing of the such. I defend the science.

pete311

03-17-2017, 12:01 PM

PhD's in WHAT? Man-made constructs? THERE lies your "man-made". You just ain't getting it. These people are paid to come to the conclusion the people paying them want them to. Hell, give ME a grant. I'll try to figure out why snails are slow and slimy. And I'm going to make sure I spend every dime explaining why there are no results so I can get another grant.

It cracks me up you people buy off on paying for these quacks that're just soaking up money at your expense. And the taxpayer's. We could pay off the deficit not paying for these junk science programs.

"We can stop the Earth from getting warmer". Wal-Mart don't sell that many fans.

ugh, look around buddy, science has driven our civilization.

BoogyMan

03-17-2017, 12:03 PM

How do you know this?

That is what those words on the page you posted mean. Comprehension is key to understanding. You don't seem to understand.

What policies have I advocated for? I've said nothing of the such. I defend the science.

Egads, are you truly this thick? You have politicized climate all over the place here.

pete311

03-17-2017, 12:04 PM

Egads, are you truly this thick? You have politicized climate all over the place here.

What policies, tell me

BoogyMan

03-17-2017, 12:17 PM

What policies, tell me

Read your own writings man-child.

NightTrain

03-17-2017, 12:24 PM

You make it sound so simple. Anyone can be an astrophysicist or climatologist in a few short seconds apparently. It's not hard to understand that the composition of our atmosphere affects how the solar energy behaves.

I like to speak plainly. It makes having a discussion easier.

It is a complex science, and one that isn't understood as evidenced by ALL of the computer models attempting to recreate our climate failing. They're wildly inaccurate.

Time and again we've seen scandals of the scientists throwing scientific method to the wind and adjusting variables to get their desired results. There are many more shenanigans that haven't been uncovered... yet. Like all underhanded schemes, sooner or later the truth comes out.

Sure, there are many ethical scientists out there, but the ones that get headlines are the ones promoting silly doomsday scenarios and millions of idiots worldwide nod their heads in agreement that it's 'settled' when it most clearly is not.

Show me ONE computer model that works. Just one. You can't, because it doesn't exist and in order to make it work, the variables are tweaked - and that means it's broken.

My point is, if you haven't deduced it by now, is that the prudent thing to do is wait until someone - anyone - actually creates a model that works before we start claiming idiocy a la Al Gore and rushing to counteract something we don't even understand.

I suspect that won't happen in our lifetimes because it's a tremendous algorithm encompassing thousands - if not millions - of components working in dynamic harmony, some more amplifying and others mitigating the end result of our climate.

Of all factors, the overwhelming two are solar activity and our wobble.

Mother Nature is a hell of a lot more powerful than you think she is, and it's pure arrogance thinking that short of a Nuclear Winter (again, hypothetical speculation) we can affect our climate in any meaningful way.