Great Barrier Reef "cooked" to death

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by capngeo

The EPA regulating wood stoves in the name of global warming makes just about as much sense as collecting cow farts

There are other reasons too for regulating wood stoves - safety and efficiency.

btw if you could collect cow farts, you'd make a fortune. Marketing might be a hurdle...

[buzzstar]

Originally Posted by jackdale

You use your CRAAP detector.

https://www.csuchico.edu/lins/handou...l_websites.pdf

It worked! It centers on the quoted post.

[buzzstar]

Originally Posted by capngeo

The fire/growth cycle is natural, necessary and pervasive where man keeps his fingers out of the forest. Mostly the result of costly real estate going up in flames drove forest managers to fight ALL fires with a vengeance.

A corollary to this is the Bozo who erects a mega-beach-mansion on a sandspit, then howls about global warming destroying his home; however I digress: .... Like the fool who builds on the beach, ...

.... sort of like in Indonesia and Brazil, but without the housing?

.... Mostly the eastern coast of the USA, but in other places such as the Gulf Coast and Malibu, California. Isn't the latter the real reason for federal flood insurance? So the lesser taxpayers are able to help the richer, smarter ones rebuild from the fully predictable, known, and specific repeated certainties encountered by the wealthy and fortunate that no rational underwriter would even consider at the prices offered?

WHERE are the moderators who should end this nonsense?

[chala]

Originally Posted by Scotty Kiwi

.. it is why now, pumping stations are getting build to replenish dams from lower reservoir.

Can you see the problem in that statement?

Yes. If you do not read the following one.

Originally Posted by chala

Expensive to the environment if taking advantage of different electricity tariffs.

Also in the case of water diversion, International Laws may require that the water removed from one river for hydroelectric power be returned to that river.

[chala]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

btw if you could collect cow farts, you'd make a fortune. Marketing might be a hurdle...

Enteric fermentation,

quote: “In actuality it's not as much the farting that's the problem, cows' burping and manure contribute more methane gas than flatulence.”

Do Cow Farts Actually Contribute to Global Warming?

And yes some farmers do collect the gas from their animals to use it in electricity generation.

[first wind]

Originally Posted by NorthSea

You mockers are delusional. Global warming is not a theory, it is a series of facts. Why don't you educate yourselves? Read some books and scientific articles on the subject. The overwhelming consensus of the scientific community is that overwhelming planetary changes are happening at an unprecedented rate. If you want to make a joke out of it to help you with your denial, you show yourselves as the shallow, selfish people that you are.

actually, there are a lot of scientists that disagree with global warming/human caused global warming.

for one thing, the data collection that supports it is corrupted. that is a fact. a lot of the recording stations have been closed down for some time and data from other stations, in different areas, has been assigned to replace data from the closed stations. often, this means that data from a warmer low altitude station is assigned to the record from a high altitude station which would normally have cooler temps. thus, making it appear as if temps are really on the rise.

the present government supports the global warming shtick. there are only two ways scientists get money to be scientists and pay their bills: private industry/interests and government. if you work for oil companies, you had better take their side. if you work for government or 'green' industries, you had better say the sky is falling. you are not going to collect a paycheck if your expert opinion is in opposition to your employer's stance. science is not neutral and unbiased.

another thing, the sun goes through warm and cool phases. presently, it is in a warm phase. the entire solar system is warming up. think we caused that?

when mount st. helens blew up, the scientists said it released more pollution into the air than the human race has created since we have been here. over the centuries, how many other volcanoes have gone pop? they didn't turn the earth into a sauna any more that mount st. helens did. in comparison, how can we possibly have created global warming?

it has been pointed out by many scientists that the co2 levels increase after global temps rise. not before. rising co2 levels are caused by global warming. they don't cause it.

add to this that there are no good 'green' solutions for energy production. all have their problems. neither wind nor sun is dependable equally in all areas. wind generation kills lots of birds... birds like eagles that are on the endangered list.

solar causes higher atmospheric temps in the air above them. so much so that solar farms can cook birds that fly overhead. so, how is large scale solar power going to stop global warming?

nuclear power is a real no brainer. besides the environmental issues caused when SHTF, they generate tons of toxic waste that we do not know how to get rid of. there are butt loads of rusting steel drums full of the stuff at the bottom of the ocean. how's that for environmentally friendly energy?

since the planet has been here, it has had many cooling or warming times. at one time, the entire planet was a ball of ice for a million years and 99% of all life went extinct. other times it was hot and dry; like when dinosaurs were here. there were times when it was hot and humid, like when titanoboa was slithering around. there were full blown ice ages when mammoths walked the earth. between 950 ad and 1250 ad the world experienced an unusually warm period. in the 14th century 'the little ice age' began and only recently ended( that would mean that the temps we thought were normal were actually cooler than normal).

i am not saying we don't have an impact. we do. look at all the trash everywhere and google hormone mimicking chemicals. what i am saying is that the evidence for human caused global warming just isn't very solid. in fact, since global temperatures have swept from one extreme to the other since the beginning and man was only here for a tiny bit of time, what actually constitutes 'normal' or 'abnormal' global temperatures?

a point to note, though: despite the fact that the earth has gone through such major climate changes, life on the planet continues. adapt or die. it's been that way ever since live emerged. it's a natural process.

the whole thing is a cash cow for 'green' industries and a great vote generator for certain types of politicians. vote for them because they will save the world from global warming.

[Tetepare]

For Leif ericsson global recovery is 1000 years too late.

[Capt Phil]

As one of the deplorable, shallow, ignorant dumb shits who still feel that unproven science is still unproven, I have long felt that caring for the environment is important but the fanatics who kneel to the alter of Al Gore have a screw loose.
There are many aboard here who have come to the party a little late and care little for those of us who have worked for many years in our own way to hold our own little worlds together.
The hysterical bleating of folks who swallow the political crap currently being peddled as the flavor of the moment need to get a grip and take a more measured and calm approach to the whole environmental issue. Phil

[Hearts Content]

Originally Posted by Tricolor

Higher water temperatures in 2016 caused the worst destruction of corals ever recorded on Australia's Great Barrier Reef, a study has found.

Great Barrier Reef suffered worst bleaching on record in 2016, report finds - BBC News

Record die-off of Great Barrier Reef coral confirmed by scientists, while some tourist areas improved - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Fake news, hot off the press!

What's sad is that these money launders actually the damage the credibility and cause of actual conservation.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

As one of the deplorable, shallow, ignorant dumb shits who still feel that unproven science is still unproven, I have long felt that caring for the environment is important but the fanatics who kneel to the alter of Al Gore have a screw loose.
There are many aboard here who have come to the party a little late and care little for those of us who have worked for many years in our own way to hold our own little worlds together.
The hysterical bleating of folks who swallow the political crap currently being peddled as the flavor of the moment need to get a grip and take a more measured and calm approach to the whole environmental issue. Phil

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

As one of the deplorable, shallow, ignorant dumb shits who still feel that unproven science is still unproven, I have long felt that caring for the environment is important but the fanatics who kneel to the alter of Al Gore have a screw loose.
There are many aboard here who have come to the party a little late and care little for those of us who have worked for many years in our own way to hold our own little worlds together.
The hysterical bleating of folks who swallow the political crap currently being peddled as the flavor of the moment need to get a grip and take a more measured and calm approach to the whole environmental issue. Phil

Ditto Phil, Ditto.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

As one of the deplorable, shallow, ignorant dumb shits who still feel that unproven science is still unproven, I have long felt that caring for the environment is important but the fanatics who kneel to the alter of Al Gore have a screw loose.
There are many aboard here who have come to the party a little late and care little for those of us who have worked for many years in our own way to hold our own little worlds together.
The hysterical bleating of folks who swallow the political crap currently being peddled as the flavor of the moment need to get a grip and take a more measured and calm approach to the whole environmental issue. Phil

Gore's Law:

As an online climate change debate grows longer, the probability that denier arguments will descend into attacks on Al Gore approaches one.

Here's a hint. Al Gore could be short, evil and fond of child sacrifice. He could emit more CO2 snoring at night than Christopher Monckton does all year. And his movie could be even more inaccurate than the Great Global Warming Swindle. But this wouldn't change a thing. What matters is not Al Gore's character but science. And, in the case of climate change, it's awfully compelling.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Carry on....the MMGWC is in Pacic.

[varkpilot]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

As one of the deplorable, shallow, ignorant dumb shits who still feel that unproven science is still unproven, I have long felt that caring for the environment is important but the fanatics who kneel to the alter of Al Gore have a screw loose.
There are many aboard here who have come to the party a little late and care little for those of us who have worked for many years in our own way to hold our own little worlds together.
The hysterical bleating of folks who swallow the political crap currently being peddled as the flavor of the moment need to get a grip and take a more measured and calm approach to the whole environmental issue. Phil

Well said, Phil!!!

[buzzstar]

The use of the word, "consensus," as quoted from North Sea in post #486 is a disqualifier. No science is involved in a consensus or its relatives, such as general agreement, in principle, etc. It would be akin to taking a poll, involving a "yes," or "no, " vote among the many posters to this topic, and saying the one with the most votes was now an established scientific principle. BTW, if anyone has forgotten, the actual topic was the Great Barrier Reef, a huge feature that, until very recently in history (how long? maybe 60 years or less) that was often seen in parts, but little studied as a whole or in parts. I am sure the Oz Goods will tell me not only if I am incorrect, but if so, why. Thanks.