Weather is cyclical. Period. I will say though that the increase in urbanization has led to warmer temps in big cities where records and measurements are taken. More asphalt and concrete traps more heat. Pretty simple
My weather has changed a little. Just like everyone else's. We seem to get a lot of temp swings, wind and a bit more rain. Did we (humans) cause it...well, maybe a small percentage, but overall? No, im not buying it. If you're easily offended, turn the page now.. . . . . 24/7 news cycles started in 1980. CNN covered the Gulf War. It was highly successful! It only took about 15 years for all the major brands to get in on their piece of the 24/7 news profit pie. Then came morning shows. Then opinions, and pundits. All looking for their time in the spotlight. It's only gone down hill from there. The bigger the headlines, the more money there is to be made. Nobody even looks at "average" headlines. But, when the headline is "extreme" it catches everyone's eye... They tune in. What happens when they tune in? Money comes in...the advertisers make money. When the advertisers make money... they spend more money on advertisements....to make more money... Why does The Weather Channel have Jim Cantore standing out for 12 hours in a blizzard?...it brings in money! I remember when TWC ...predicted weather... Why did Anderson Cooper stand in waste deep water to report on a flood? ...Ratings...Money! Scientific research and money go hand in hand. Do you think colleges and professors (that receive big funding and grants for research) will ever say "all the info is collected....there's no more need for research." ?? ...Yeah, i don't think so either. The louder they scream, the more money they get. We're spending $400 billion a year on climate change world wide. Solar. Wind. Research.... Denying climate change is denying the climate saviors their money. You all have heard the saying...follow the money... And yes, the climate is changing. But that doesn't mean my tax bracket should go up to 90%
One issue comes to mind: do these arguments condemn all of humanity - military, faith, politics, education... ???? (FHC ? ) Most folks know that carbon dioxide is chemically active based on their first hand experience with soda, beer, champagne... Now have 9,000,000,000+ people dump an astounding amount of CO2 into the atmosphere at a very fast rate... Hang on to your hats, the world has many interesting events ahead, someday...
It's Saturday morning, raining, I've had too much coffee, and may offend some, but here is what I see: Yes, sensational headlines generate money. And yes, most of the news outlets realize this. They are not in the business for the public good, they like to make money. BUT the viewers look for those headlines, especially ones that agree with their train of thought. Why does TWC have to name every winter storm that is coming through? Why does their headline show only the 1 in 100 chance of extreme snow accumulation? Ratings & views & $$$$$. If you want real a forecast go to NOAA, they don't have the budget for a real pretty site, the info is a little harder to find, and the presentation is a little dry BUT the facts and odds of occurrence are there. Same thing with the news, biggest headline gets the most attention. Why is it that a minor incident in the middle east becomes a banner headline, and the next morning the price of gas at my local station goes up a nickle. Then there is no reaction to the initial incident but it takes a month for the gas price to slowly trickle down again if at all. In the days of print news, or an evening broadcast they had time to look at what came over the wire, see if there was any reaction, then report the story in context. Gas stations would raise their price in reaction to a cost increase from the refinery, not on an unsubstantiated wire story. We now live reacting to the raw news over the wire. Newspapers used to put the news on the front page and their opinions on the editorial page. Now the news is totally biased by their opinions and in many cases the opinions are the front page news. I get a lot of my international news from the BBC. While their bias shows a little relating to UK news their international news is pretty good. And their opinions are clearly marked. We, including me, need the expert analysis that the slower news cycle gave us. They had the resources to figure out the who, what, and why of the wire stories. The information on the 24 hour instant feed is only great if we have the context and knowledge to understand it and react proportionally. As this country grew we needed every resource to support that growth. Companies grew, and were profitable, because they provided a product that worked and that the customers wanted or needed at a price they could afford. They used the cheapest possible resource to produce the best product they could. They did not understand the consequences of some of their actions. They brought us an industrial and technological revolution. They won wars. Did they make mistakes? Yes, but not on purpose. Did they make this country great? Yes. We now can see some of the consequences. We need to stop thinking about only our pockets but more of the common good. My mother still uses a GE refrigerator from the 60s and it still works. Is it energy efficient? No. In the last 20 years I have gone through six(6) refrigerators. Each one failed sometime just after the warrantee period. Industrial science can now predict MTF(mean time to failure) fairly well. Does the cost of manufacturing those six(6) refrigerators offset the wasted energy of that 50+ year old one? Do the manufacturers make more money on a new one every 4 years? Does the old one have a gas in it that will damage the ozone, yes (but when we break up her house we are aware of that and know how to recycle it.) If we denied the climate saviors their money we would have just brought it to the dump and walked away from it. And wondered why incidents of skin cancers were rising sooo much. My '67 GTO got about 10mpg on road trips. The '13 RAM pickup does about 20. Bigger engine, heavier vehicle, more capacity, government intervention. I live downwind from a power plant that used to burn bunker-oil. Would have to wipe up the soot regularly, especially when all those old, inefficient air conditioners were running during the summer. The air-conditioners have gotten more efficient, the power plant converted to a cleaner fuel, and I can see the lack of soot on the furniture. Government intervention. Have the incidents of lung cancer in the area gone down as well, time & RESEARCH will tell. There are so many examples of government intervention hurting us and the research ending up a waste of money. But there are also the ones that help. If I don't see something the government does directly helping ME, I don't condemn it, I try see see how it helps the population in general. If I realize it only PROFITS a small group I try to get those who pushed for it out of office. We are slowly pushing this planet towards its limits. We need research to figure out what those limits are so our children's children have a place to live. Somebody has to pay for that research and I don't see the conglomerates of today digging into their profits to do it. So taxes dig into everybody's pockets to try to find the answers. Problem is our government is more guided by those conglomerates and a lot of the research dollars are wasted... I remember GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE. I wish we could go back there. If you got this far, thank you for considering my views. Whether or not you agree with what I wrote, at least you considered hearing somebody else's view. KaptJaq
Why would a greenhouse pump c02 into the air? To poison the plants? No. To have a 30% better crop yield. C02 is life. Not poison.
In a controlled environment, yes. It is also a way to increase corporate profits. Do they re-capture what the plants do not use from the CO2 enriched environment? Does the excess get released into the general atmosphere? When all the excess foliage from the enriched atmosphere decomposes, do they capture that CO2? Responsible technology is great, profits at any cost can be dangerous. KaptJaq
I'm only 30, so not too much time to speak of. But I have noticed at least in the last few years the springs and fall have been extremely wet! I know this because I hobby farm and it's always a dance to try and get ground plowed and planted in time. But I do not believe in the government hysteria. World is always changing. I mean the entire planet was covered in ice at one time. Before people were here! So cavemen's Silverados and snowmobile smoke didn't cause the ice to melt.
The earth has had SCIENTIFICALLY DOCUMENTED PERIODS DOZENS OF TIMES OVER MILLIONS OF YEARS where it has been very hot And then very cold. This all before humans were even here. IMHO if you think that now because we are here and it has in fact gotten slightly warmer that it is our fault, we’ll then please explain the dozens of other times it has happened.
I literally live on the crust of the floor of an ancient ocean that never dissolved. (thus no wells, so we haul water in the pickup ) The geography here amazes me! 45 minutes north east of me is an entire house built of dinosaur fossils, makes me
In a nut shell... climates changing, here on earth... is very very complicated... like juggling Jello...
One difference though, those changes occurred over thousands of years. The change we are currently experiencing is much faster. Extinction rates are roughly 100 times greater than normal and its most likely due to humans. To think we can’t alter this place I think is short sighted.
Lesson for today: 1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth. 2. The sun is a giant nuclear furnace that controls the climates of all its planets. 3. The earth is one of the sun’s planets. 4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun. 5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks. Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?
The mass of a U238 atom is less that a speck compared to the size of a grain of sand BUT under the guidance of human intervention, 700 milligrams of them (less than 1/3 the mass of a US Dime) released the equivalent energy of 15,000 tons of TNT, instantly destroying a city and killing over 100,000 human specks. Don't underestimate the human speck.
You can find the heating degree data I mentioned earlier here: https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/browser/?tbl=T01.09 Just out of curiosity I plotted two areas: It certainly is going down in these two areas. These are in what the EIA calls "census areas."
Zactly... I'd add that keeping a lid on those dime size U238 noise makers miiiight be 15,000 times more important than the climate/weather... especially cause there's less than speck humans involved...
A properly warned end to a war they wouldn't admit losing at that point. Saved countless American lives.
