Frozen Delaware bay

And polar bears.

 

Hey ya never know! One of those suckers could float his way over here.

 

updated pic

 

local doesn't make global Time will tell whether nature or man is the force. any time you can't stay with your original title(global warming) to draw more people into an argument( discussion) that brings a question to your side? climate change has always happened( we are still ending the last ice age) and will continue to change. follow the $$$$$ and the answer is rt. in frt.of us! AGW tells us that man is the trump and mother nature is the weak suit. read and make up your mind. me ,until the agw folks can explain natural changes of the past and only come back with todays changes caused by co2. I'm not paying in.

as an aside the last ice age was from 10-15k years ago. ice age cycle every 10-15 years or so. last one 10-15k years ago, next one?

 

Has the UN-IPCC ever predicted anything that has actually happened? They call the last 17 years of no global temp change, a "pause". They not only didn't predict it was going to happen, but they don't know why it's happened.
Isn't that special...

 

that is a great example of the PC type of stuff that adds to the overall discussion. using your own local food(probably caught by you), on your own equipment, on your own property? all wrong in the mind of your part time neighbor. Bet they didn't know what you were doing to cause that pollution?(sarc) obviously a little narrow minded.

not to say improvement in our atmosphere are to be mocked. scrubbers added to the Sandwich, Ma. oil fired power plant have erased the smoke plume dating back to the 70's. smog in Tucson, Az. from LA smog spillover and the copper smelters gone from emission rules and mfg. attrition.(lived there 69-72) if solar and wind can be competitive let them be built for all our benefit.

like your part time neighbor one side seems to puts it's head down and full speed ahead, my way or the highway. one example would be the high electric rates here in Mass. close coal plants today, we'll figure out where to get cheap electricity somewhere later. how many years of uncompetitive electric rate will we endure( almost $.26/kw) before it changes. no reason for mass. ratepayers to be paying double what some neighboring or close by states pay. after this cold winter locally some folks face an extreme hardship come spring and summer to pay for a necessity, ELECTRICITY!

I've gone on longer than I should have, have a day

 

Nantucket has replaced the generators with an undersea cable. wind? I originally loved the Cape wind idea? UNTIL the ratepayers would have to foot the cost. it seems that that project will bite the dust as contracts have not been renewed with Nat Grid and NSTAR.( my avatar is Oak Bluffs harbor, our cottage is in the background)
My kids other family operate the ONLY wind turbine in Plymouth, Ma. it has been very successful for them, but they have no plans to build any more. they have an ideal situation, they own and manage an industrial park. regulations in permits are too costly and time consuming. all the several other applications are tied up in that process.

 

this makes you think alittle?

 

The average person has to become a climate scientist to figure out how their being duped.
I don't wanna be a climate scientist.

 

in Mass. it is as easy as opening your electric bill

 

kind of amazing in this day. curious what is the Block's year round pop? at least this year there cost is down 30% if oil.

 

What started as a push against large scale pollution 20 plus years ago, sure has morphed into a giant ball of Jello chit. Good article out today, makes it clear why every single person in the US (denier or hysteric) should at least think about it... a little.

The Climate Con Goes On
February 21, 2015 | Paul Driessen



Nearly 200 countries may sign a modest Kyoto II climate treaty, say December 2014 media reports from Lima, Peru. But will they agree to stop using coal to generate electricity? No. Curtail their economic growth? No. Cease emitting carbon dioxide? Maybe, but only a little, sometime in the future, when it is more convenient to do so, without any binding commitments. Then why would they sign a treaty?

Primarily because they expect to get free energy technology transfers, and billions of dollars a year in climate “mitigation, adaptation and reparation” money from Western nations that they blame (and which blame themselves) for the “dangerous climate change,” rising seas and “extreme weather” that they claim are “unprecedented” and due to carbon dioxide emissions during the 150 years since the Industrial Revolution began. These FRCs (Formerly Rich Countries) have implemented low-carbon energy policies and penalties that have strangled their economies, dramatically increased energy prices and killed millions of jobs. But now poor developing countries demand that they also transfer $100 billion per year, for decades (with most of that probably going to their governing elites’ Swiss banks accounts).

Where is this likely to take us? Now, Christiana Figueres, the UN’s chief climate change official, has declared that her unelected bureaucrats are undertaking “probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the [global] economic development model.” Her incredible admission underscores what another high-ranking IPCC official said several years ago: “Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection. The next world climate summit is actually an economy summit, during which thedistribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”

Why would any sane families or nations consign their fates to such insane, perverse arrangements? The arrangements are being imposed on them, through force, fabrication and fraud.

Poor, middle and working class families will get little but more layoffs, further reductions in living standards and longer postponement of dreams. But meanwhile Climate Chaos, Inc. (Big Green, Big Government, alarmist scientists, crony corporatist “green” energy companies, and allied universities and scientific groups) will become richer, gain more control over our lives and livelihoods, and rarely be held accountable for the damage they cause. Retracting their “dangerous manmade climate change” tautologies would endanger their money, power and reputations.

That’s why their hypotheses, assertions, intentions and computer models always trump reality. It’s why they are increasingly vicious and relentless invilifying realist scientists who challenge their “97% consensus” and “manmade climate catastrophe” mantras – and in demanding that the news media ignore experts and analyses that do not toe the Climate Chaos line. They denigrate realists as “climate deniers” (deliberately suggesting Holocaust denial) and “oil industry shills” (while hiding their own suspect ethics, data “adjustments,” and Big Green billion-dollar Russian and other funding sources).

Realists get precious little (or no) oil money and constantly underscore the role of climate change throughout Earth and human history. What we contest is the notion that climate and weather fluctuations today are manmade, unprecedented and dangerous. Alarmists deny that Earth’s climate is often in flux, solar and other natural forces drive weather and climate, and atmospheric carbon dioxide plays only a minimal role. Real-world evidence demolishes virtually every alarmist claim.

The climate reality record is presented in a readable, thought-provoking new book, About Face: Why the world needs more CO2; The failed science of global warming, by U.S. economist Arthur Hughes, Australian geologist Cliff Ollier and Canadian meteorologist Madhav Khandekar. Sea level is rising at only1.5 mm per year now (six inches per century), they note, and there is zero evidence that the rate is escalating or that coastal communities are at risk. Nor is “ocean acidification” a legitimate problem.

Alarmists use it to replace other disproven scares with a new panic. Earth’s oceans have never been acidic. They are mildly alkaline. Their enormous volumes of water cannot become acidic – that is, plummet from an 8.2 pH level 150 years ago and their current 8.1 pH into the acidic realm of 7.0 or lower, due to the tiny amount of atmospheric CO2 attributable to fossil fuel use, in less than five centuries.

The tiny effect of rising CO2 levels on climate contrasts sharply with their enormous benefits to plant growth and agriculture. Not only is more CO2 “greening” deserts, forests and grasslands; it is increasing grain and food yields worldwide, and helping people in developing nations live longer, healthier lives.

Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are not in danger of collapsing, the About Face authors demonstrate; in fact, they are growing. Similarly, contrary to another scare, extreme weather events are not increasing.

No Category 3-5 hurricane has struck the United States for a record nine years, and Earth’s temperature has not budged for 18 years. Claims that 2014 was “the hottest year on record” are based on airport and urban measurements that are higher than rural locations and are always “adjusted” upward, with year-to-year differences measured in hundredths of a degree. Outside those areas, for most of the world – the 70% of Earth’s surface that is oceans and 85% of land area that is mountains, deserts, grasslands, tundra, and boreal or tropical rain forests – practically no data exist. So NASA and other alarmists falsely extrapolate from their manipulated urban data to fill in massive gaps for the other 95% of the Earth.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Northeast is suffering through record snows and its lowest winter temperatures in 20 years, and America’s East Coast air has been 25-30 degrees F below normal. England’s winter death rate this year is almost one-third higher than normal: nearly 29,000 deaths in a two-week period in January, largely because people can no longer afford to heat their homes properly, due to UK climate policies.

What’s really going on? Our sun “has gone quiet again, during what is likely to be the weakest sunspot cycle in more than a century,” dating back to 1906, says Vencore weather analyst Paul Dorian.

Alarmists don’t want to talk about that – or about what is happening in Asia. BP’s Energy Outlook 2035 report forecasts that China’s oil, natural gas and coal use will increase by some 50% and its carbon dioxide emissions by 37% over the next 20 years. India’s energy production will soar 117% – with fossil fuels accounting for 87% of all demand in 2035, and its CO2 emissions also skyrocketing. So even if the USA and EU eliminatedfossil fuels, atmospheric carbon dioxide would continue to climb.

Climate alarmists want the newspaper and television media to ignore this information and the “skeptics” who might present it. Bill Nye “the science guy” recently asked MSNBC to link all weather events to climate change. “Just say the words climate change” when you talk about this winter’s cold and snow,” he begged Joy Reid. A new study shows how widespread these repulsive practices have become.

A George Mason University analysis found that U.S. media outlets “pretty much” agree that climate change “is real, it’s happening, and we’re responsible. That debate is over,” quoting one journalist. As a result, “critics are no longer being interviewed,” the study said. In the view of “mainstream” media outlets, getting or presenting both sides on the climate issue is a “false balance.” At least one news organization now has an explicit editorial policy “discouraging reporters from quoting climate change deniers in environment or science coverage,” theWashington Examiner noted.

Media reputations are at stake. They’ve been in bed so long with the Climate Chaos complex that acknowledging the critical role of natural forces, the expertise of climate realists, the debate that still rages, or the Grand Canyon between climate crisis claims and real-world evidence would destroy what little credibility the media still has. It would also start the collapse of the Climate Chaos house of cards.

But the real stakes are much higher. They are the businesses, jobs, families, living standards and liberties that are increasingly threatened if President Obama, EPA, Big Green and the United Nations remain free to impose their climate and energy agenda. Responsible governors, state legislators and members of Congress must get involved, block these actions, and roll back the destructive policies.

 

unfortunitly the climate, the economic systems of the world, and politics are all joined at the hip. there is no easy answer here. positioning for the right move is where it is all at. China did that to us last fall with our latest climate agreement(continue along the same road for what the next 15 years). further we accepted it as great deal?(at least at administrative levels) a lot of truth in the article. but there are always good things coming from a change to low co2 renewables.. right or wrong renewables have a place and should gradually find it. when politics takes over they often move too quickly or are misplaced at that time. some common sense is really needs to be brought in .one simple one, if coal is bad, time closings with opening of a lesser evil( wind, solar, nat gas) and reduce adverse effects on local communities.

thanks to the folks in this discussion for keeping it civil. also to the powers that be for allowing this touchy subject to be discussed. there are a lot of places near by that p*ss all over anybody who dares take an alternate position.