Coldest winter in 15 years, Environment Canada says

[Said1]

Big whoop. I like what the climatologist says at the end of the article.....about weather behaving as it should. :laugh2:


Blast from the past? Coldest winter in 15 years, Environment Canada says


Not since the grunge era and Brian Mulroney's days as prime minister has Canada experienced a winter quite as bitter as the one expected to creep in this December, Environment Canada forecasted on Friday.


In its first winter outlook of the year, the agency predicts that until February, climates across most of the country will be the coldest in 15 years, with the exception of a small pocket in southern Ontario.

Environment Canada senior climatologist David Phillips said the trend in recent years of uncharacteristically warm, short winters will be wiped out by a chilly reminder of what a real Canadian winter feels like.

Although it won't necessarily be "the winter from hell or face-numbing wind chills every time," Phillips said temperature-wise, "we could have conditions that would be perhaps three-quarters or a degree colder than normal."

Colder air this year is expected to drive down temperatures.

"We think that with La Nina — which encourages more Canadian air, more Siberian air, whatever you want to call it, Alaskan air — it tends to be more of that flow," he said, referring to the phenomenon of lower-than-normal temperatures in the Pacific Ocean.

The cooler climate will likely also blanket some cities with snow after years without a white Christmas, he said.

A hydrant in the St. John's area is obscured by snow.
(Canadian Press)
Last year, a number of traditionally cold and snow-covered cities such as Quebec City, Ottawa and Timmins, Ont., had their first green Christmas in decades.

There are several up-sides to the mercury dipping, Phillips said. Winter sports enthusiasts might embrace the cooler winter, as would businesses that rely on the snow.

"I always think it's good for the economy when weather is behaving like it should, when winters are cold and summers are hot," he said, adding more people will likely book holidays to escape the harsh weather.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2007/11/30/winter-forecast.html

[diuretic]

You're a hardy people, winter for me is an average temp of about 6c in the middle of winter. This minus stuff is bloody unbelievable.

[glockmail]

Global warming! :lol:

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Yeah we all know global warming is the main cause for global cooling.
2. Wait for it!
3. Neo~Liberal spin machine is warming up now!:laugh2:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[diuretic]

Newsflash - it's called "climate change".

Question though - why the serial scepticism? I mean I know why some big businesses are spinning the scepticism thing, it could mean increased costs for them (which they will pass on anyway) but why is it that so many of you embrace the scepticism when there's nothing in it for you. Why is that?

[glockmail]

Newsflash - it's called "climate change".

Question though - why the serial scepticism? I mean I know why some big businesses are spinning the scepticism thing, it could mean increased costs for them (which they will pass on anyway) but why is it that so many of you embrace the scepticism when there's nothing in it for you. Why is that?
We don't like to be lied to.

BTW how much money does Al Gore make by spouting his religion?

[diuretic]

We don't like to be lied to.

How would you know if you were?




BTW how much money does Al Gore make by spouting his religion?

I think it's important to accept that a whole bunch of scientific views about climate change isn't a "religion". I won't begin to attack the notion because I'll end up offending religious people but suffice to say that science isn't religion. And using "religion" in a derogatory form doesn't do much for the elegance of your argument, you being a scientist should know the foregoing better than me.

How much money goes Gore make from his efforts? I have no idea. Just like I have no idea about how much expenditure is involved.

If you're arguing a conflict of interest fine, go ahead, I don't like your chances of succeeding (not with me, with the argument itself, this isn't a competition) with it though.

[MtnBiker]

Money and global warming, hmm. Of the signatories to the Kyoto Protocol that violate their terms, where does the money go from the fines? And who (not the nations) ultimately pays those fines?

[remie]

Its all Bush's fault

[glockmail]

[1]How would you know if you were?

[2]I think it's important to accept that a whole bunch of scientific views about climate change isn't a "religion". I won't begin to attack the notion because I'll end up offending religious people but suffice to say that science isn't religion. And using "religion" in a derogatory form doesn't do much for the elegance of your argument, you being a scientist should know the foregoing better than me.

[3]How much money goes Gore make from his efforts? I have no idea. Just like I have no idea about how much expenditure is involved.

If you're arguing a conflict of interest fine, go ahead, I don't like your chances of succeeding (not with me, with the argument itself, this isn't a competition) with it though.

1. I know it’s a lie because the Gore-types never acknowledge conflicting results. Instead they triangulate their position by suggesting "climate change" like was done here.
2. It is a religion as it is based on faith, not science.
3. Conflict of interest is the issue. I don’t give a shit about how much he makes off of it. Fools and their money, after all. But this guy is claiming the sky is falling and all the while he’s selling “carbon credits”. Its bullshit.

[diuretic]

1. I know it’s a lie because the Gore-types never acknowledge conflicting results. Instead they triangulate their position by suggesting "climate change" like was done here.
2. It is a religion as it is based on faith, not science.
3. Conflict of interest is the issue. I don’t give a shit about how much he makes off of it. Fools and their money, after all. But this guy is claiming the sky is falling and all the while he’s selling “carbon credits”. Its bullshit.

I'm listening to some news reports here which are discussing our policy shift. One commentator (from a bank) is saying that carbon trading and associated ventures could make our current mining boom like miniscule in comparison, that there could be "trillions" of dollars in it. Seems like a sensible use of market forces.

No need to panic, the world won't end if we take action now to slow down the rate of global climate change, best we do it now rather than be panicked into having to do something really radical in future.

[Said1]

I'm listening to some news reports here which are discussing our policy shift. One commentator (from a bank) is saying that carbon trading and associated ventures could make our current mining boom like miniscule in comparison, that there could be "trillions" of dollars in it. Seems like a sensible use of market forces.

No need to panic, the world won't end if we take action now to slow down the rate of global climate change, best we do it now rather than be panicked into having to do something really radical in future.

I saw a bit about that on the news this afternoon. I didn't catch it all. Ddid they sign at Bal, or are planning to in the future?

[diuretic]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/03/2108345.htm

All done. And he (our PM) and the Treasurer and a couple of ministers with relevant portfolios are going to Bali. Things are looking up :)

[glockmail]

I'm listening to some news reports here which are discussing our policy shift. One commentator (from a bank) is saying that carbon trading and associated ventures could make our current mining boom like miniscule in comparison, that there could be "trillions" of dollars in it. Seems like a sensible use of market forces.

No need to panic, the world won't end if we take action now to slow down the rate of global climate change, best we do it now rather than be panicked into having to do something really radical in future. The problem is that trading carbon credits creates nothing of value. Mining, on the other hand, does.

[diuretic]

The problem is that trading carbon credits creates nothing of value. Mining, on the other hand, does.

I thought about that. I'm probably doing a reductio on this but it seems to me that (let's take mining as an example) that we (using Aus for the moment) dig up our minerals, let's say iron ore. That of itself is nothing, it's work which at that point isn't productive. The iron ore is transported to China or India, still just work. The iron ore is smelted into steel. Still work but at least that's value-adding, the commodity has changed from basically metallic dirt to something that can be used, say building an office in which people can work, or building a block of houses which people can live in. So yes, definitely there's value created.

Carbon trading can lead to a good as well, if it's cumulative effect is to slow, halt or reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (I'm being simplistic I know but sophisticated science discussion is beyond me) then that helps humanity as much as a new office block or a row of houses. At least that's my thinking on it.

[gabosaurus]

The Mandolin Wind
Doesn't change a thing

[glockmail]

I thought about that. I'm probably doing a reductio on this but it seems to me that (let's take mining as an example) that we (using Aus for the moment) dig up our minerals, let's say iron ore. That of itself is nothing, it's work which at that point isn't productive. The iron ore is transported to China or India, still just work. The iron ore is smelted into steel. Still work but at least that's value-adding, the commodity has changed from basically metallic dirt to something that can be used, say building an office in which people can work, or building a block of houses which people can live in. So yes, definitely there's value created.

Carbon trading can lead to a good as well, if it's cumulative effect is to slow, halt or reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (I'm being simplistic I know but sophisticated science discussion is beyond me) then that helps humanity as much as a new office block or a row of houses. At least that's my thinking on it.I've thought about this as well; certain industries add wealth to society by creating material goods, and if that is worth more to a capitalist society than say, a currency trader. I’ve come to the conclusion that as a true capitalist this issue is not something that I should be concerned with.

But these carbon credits are different, in that it is the environmentalists who set the relative value of these “commodities”, and therefore use this power to advance their agenda, which when analyzed, is not as stated. For instance, an electric utility can make power from burning coal, operating 1000 windmills, or one nuclear plant. The envoros want the coal plant emissions reduced, will grant credits for the windmills but not for the nuke. It is clear, however, that the nuke is every bit as effective as reducing carbon emissions as the 1000 windmills.

Hence my assertion that these carbon credits are bullshit.

[Said1]

I'm thinking those with credits to sell wouldn't reduce industrial outputs or sell credits if that would result in loss of economic growth and vise versa re countries looking to purchase credits. I think most countries are willing to sacrefice the environment if it means economic growth.

[avatar4321]

stupid global warming.

its cold here too.

[glockmail]

stupid global warming.

its cold here too.

Its going to be a great ski weekend. :cheers2:

[diuretic]

I've thought about this as well; certain industries add wealth to society by creating material goods, and if that is worth more to a capitalist society than say, a currency trader. I’ve come to the conclusion that as a true capitalist this issue is not something that I should be concerned with.

What about professional sportspeople, what do they add to society? Can't you perceive of the enjoyment that they give to their fans as being a good? It's still a commercial activity, people pay to enter the stadium to watch the game, television companies bid to pay to show the game and they get revenue from businesses which want to advertise on their channel.



But these carbon credits are different, in that it is the environmentalists who set the relative value of these “commodities”, and therefore use this power to advance their agenda, which when analyzed, is not as stated. For instance, an electric utility can make power from burning coal, operating 1000 windmills, or one nuclear plant. The envoros want the coal plant emissions reduced, will grant credits for the windmills but not for the nuke. It is clear, however, that the nuke is every bit as effective as reducing carbon emissions as the 1000 windmills.

Hence my assertion that these carbon credits are bullshit.

I don't know if environmentalists will be setting the retail value, from what I know about it, which, granted, isn't a lot. Anyway, nothing has intrinsic value, the iron ore I referred to is just funny coloured dirt, you can't eat it so how comes it has value? It has value because lots of people want it and will pay for it, the price they're prepared to pay for that funny coloured dirt is worked out by market forces, which I understand is going to be the way that carbon credits will be valued.

[diuretic]

I'm thinking those with credits to sell wouldn't reduce industrial outputs or sell credits if that would result in loss of economic growth and vise versa re countries looking to purchase credits. I think most countries are willing to sacrefice the environment if it means economic growth.

If that's so then that simply shows how stupid we are. A country willing to sacrifice its environment for economic growth is ruled by fools and populated by willing dupes. Perhaps Marx was right, perhaps capitalism does have the seeds of its own destruction within it, because ignoring the effect of industrialism on the environment is blind greed. If that's carried through to its logical conclusion then there'll be no economies, there'll be nothing. And folks call me a nihilist! :laugh2:

[avatar4321]

If that's so then that simply shows how stupid we are. A country willing to sacrifice its environment for economic growth is ruled by fools and populated by willing dupes. Perhaps Marx was right, perhaps capitalism does have the seeds of its own destruction within it, because ignoring the effect of industrialism on the environment is blind greed. If that's carried through to its logical conclusion then there'll be no economies, there'll be nothing. And folks call me a nihilist! :laugh2:

Global warming will never effect us regardless of whether legislation is passed restricting economics or not because global warming is a total scam.

So may as well let people earn a living and survive. Any country foolish enough to place the life of plants and animals over human beings, particularly little children, is ruled by fools and populated by willing dupes.

Plants and animal can grow back quickly. Human lives are irreplacible.

[stephanie]

What I'm absolutely shocked about...

Is how many people are buying into this scam..

The trading cap system is EXTORTION...Plain and simple...
It's taking from one country to give to another...And those other countries don't have to do anything to abide by the same rules that us who are being extorted have to when it comes to their environmental so called impact on the Earth...

And then someone was quoting Marx...like is that how they REALLY WANT TO LIVE...Because that's exactly where your headed......This is another step for a counties GOVERMENT TO DICTATE HOW YOU HAVE TO LIVE....is that FREEDOM??
Us humans are continually getting a bad rap...The more we create that helps and saves lives it seems, we are now being berated for doing all that
Maybe we should just have a mass suicide so we don't hurt the Earth any longer...
Of course this suggestion would make all the Radical Environmentalist happy, I'm sure..But it wouldn't make the GOVERMENTS happy because they wouldn't have all those little peons to collect all that money from and have less people who the can control..

I'm all for finding better solutions for saving energy, doing conservation and all that...But not at the determent at us being able to make a living, or being taxed out of our money for the sake of these Environmentalist...


Amazing..:poke:

[Sitarro]

Damn winter weather........

[stephanie]

Damn winter weather........

Hey..we're enjoying global warming up here...It's 1 above zero...
Usually this time of yr...we seeing 30 to 40 BELOW ZERO...:dance:

Not much snow for snowmaching though...

[diuretic]

Global warming will never effect us regardless of whether legislation is passed restricting economics or not because global warming is a total scam.

So may as well let people earn a living and survive. Any country foolish enough to place the life of plants and animals over human beings, particularly little children, is ruled by fools and populated by willing dupes.

Plants and animal can grow back quickly. Human lives are irreplacible.

The point about global warming is that if unchecked it will kill all life on Earth. That means little children as well as pussycats and doggies and daffodils.

You're pulling my leg with your post. Jeez you had me thinking you were serious for a moment :laugh2:

[diuretic]

What I'm absolutely shocked about...

Is how many people are buying into this scam..

The trading cap system is EXTORTION...Plain and simple...
It's taking from one country to give to another...And those other countries don't have to do anything to abide by the same rules that us who are being extorted have to when it comes to their environmental so called impact on the Earth...

And then someone was quoting Marx...like is that how they REALLY WANT TO LIVE...Because that's exactly where your headed......This is another step for a counties GOVERMENT TO DICTATE HOW YOU HAVE TO LIVE....is that FREEDOM??
Us humans are continually getting a bad rap...The more we create that helps and saves lives it seems, we are now being berated for doing all that
Maybe we should just have a mass suicide so we don't hurt the Earth any longer...
Of course this suggestion would make all the Radical Environmentalist happy, I'm sure..But it wouldn't make the GOVERMENTS happy because they wouldn't have all those little peons to collect all that money from and have less people who the can control..

I'm all for finding better solutions for saving energy, doing conservation and all that...But not at the determent at us being able to make a living, or being taxed out of our money for the sake of these Environmentalist...


Amazing..:poke:

I tell you what, ignore it because it won't be us that dies from it, it will be several generations hence so why should we give a shit right? We might get a bit of discomfort in the next few years, temps may be a bit high, people in Finland might get sunstroke now and again but what the hell, we'll all be dead anyway and who gives two frigging hoots about our descendants? Just as long we we don't sucked in by all those scientists warning us about climate change. Nope, we're too damn clever to get sucked in by all those eggheads and their cleverdick science. Let's listen to big business instead. Let's allow China to keep pumping shit into their rivers and seas and into their air, because the water from their rivers and seas and the air from their landmass won't affect us will it?

[Said1]

If that's so then that simply shows how stupid we are. A country willing to sacrifice its environment for economic growth is ruled by fools and populated by willing dupes. Perhaps Marx was right, perhaps capitalism does have the seeds of its own destruction within it, because ignoring the effect of industrialism on the environment is blind greed. If that's carried through to its logical conclusion then there'll be no economies, there'll be nothing. And folks call me a nihilist! :laugh2:

Look around. Ireland for example, went over quota and were supposedly fined. Their outputs were over agreed limits due to :"unexpected" industrial growth. Go figure!

[diuretic]

Look around. Ireland for example, went over quota and were supposedly fined. Their outputs were over agreed limits due to :"unexpected" industrial growth. Go figure!

What works best, carrot or stick? :D

Anyway Ireland can go over quota, they make Guinness :coffee:

Seriously though, fair point but at least it's being managed and it's better than the head up the arse attitude of all of us doing our own thing without regard to others. I have to tell you that clean and green Australia is the highest (I think) producer on a per capita basis of CO2, no, it's not our sheep, so we need to get the finger out big time.

[glockmail]

[1]What about professional sportspeople, what do they add to society? Can't you perceive of the enjoyment that they give to their fans as being a good? It's still a commercial activity, people pay to enter the stadium to watch the game, television companies bid to pay to show the game and they get revenue from businesses which want to advertise on their channel.

[2]I don't know if environmentalists will be setting the retail value, from what I know about it, which, granted, isn't a lot. Anyway, nothing has intrinsic value, the iron ore I referred to is just funny coloured dirt, you can't eat it so how comes it has value? It has value because lots of people want it and will pay for it, the price they're prepared to pay for that funny coloured dirt is worked out by market forces, which I understand is going to be the way that carbon credits will be valued.

1. That's a good example, and why I don't try to set societal values between commodities in a true free market. It is obvious that the entertainment industry is providing products of lesser intrinsic value than farmers, but to use that as a method of setting prices is anti-capitalist and therefore stupid and wrong.
2. Again, the carbon credits are different, as they are not a true free market. The best example I can come up with I already gave, which is nuclear power. The enviro-nuts will ensure that the owners of nukes will never get the credit they deserve for providing gads of electricity with zero emmisions. Just like you or I attempting to set the realtive value of entertaiment products vs farm products, the whole concept is stupid and wrong.

[glockmail]

Look around. Ireland for example, went over quota and were supposedly fined. Their outputs were over agreed limits due to :"unexpected" industrial growth. Go figure! Ireland dropped its tax rates, spurring investment and growth. The fines were punishment from the EU for proving (again) that conservative tax policy works.

[Said1]

What works best, carrot or stick? :D

Anyway Ireland can go over quota, they make Guinness :coffee:

Seriously though, fair point but at least it's being managed and it's better than the head up the arse attitude of all of us doing our own thing without regard to others. I have to tell you that clean and green Australia is the highest (I think) producer on a per capita basis of CO2, no, it's not our sheep, so we need to get the finger out big time.


I thought it was Canada. Damn it, can't we be the best at anything aside from sports? :dance:

[diuretic]

I thought it was Canada. Damn it, can't we be the best at anything aside from sports? :dance:

Good at sports? Canada? You have to be kidding! You're probably number one in polar bear racing or something oh, I forgot curling, but REAL sports? In your dreams! :laugh2:

[glockmail]

Good at sports? Canada? You have to be kidding! You're probably number one in polar bear racing or something oh, I forgot curling, but REAL sports? In your dreams! :laugh2: Ice hockey. Eh?

[diuretic]

Ice hockey. Eh?

ONE sport then :laugh2: