Thread: Tropical Cyclone Activity [still] lowest in 30-years

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11  
    CU's Tallest Midget! PoliCon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    25,328
    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    How would I know? I'm not a scientist. Never said I was. My expertise is in writing, journalism, vetting sources and fact checking etc. I've been following the energy and oil industry's attempt to slow and muddy the scientific process for 10+ years. It's frustrating to see so many good people turn their backs on 3 decades of research and consensus simply because they don't like Al Gore.
    did you catch that youtube video I posted that explained how Maggie Thatcher is at least partly to blame for creating the climate crisis? Oh and - for the record - I was a global warming skeptic long before Al Gore took up the cause. I remember when they were suggesting that we needed to cover the polar caps with coal dust to prevent a new Iceage - AND I remember when the world was going to end if we didn't ban CFC's . . . . Global warming will become passe' eventually and be replaced by the next drastic anti-human anti-capitalist movement.



    Oil, coal, and energy are already positioning themselves for the next big round of bailouts in 2010. It won't happen. They'll blame the Dems, throw a ton of money at the midterms, maybe win back some seats, possibly a majority, but all that money would be better spent on R&D. They'll lose market share to smaller upstarts and fall behind on new tech development when they could and should be at the forefront.
    Amazingly enough - once upon a time everyone got around on horse back. THEN amazingly enough cars came in and replaced horses. Didn't need the government to interfere then - why do we need it now? When the next innovation comes along - it will replace what came before and it will do so without government force. If you need the government to force the change - then it's not really time for the change then is it?



    I don't even get where you're coming from...

    I point out that OP and Drudge are tying to imply that a certain study proves or disproves something that it doesn't. What's you're deal? Blogs and pundits disputing Al Gore and global warming end up pushing the GOP and conservative thinkers toward some pretty corrupt and unethical business practices. This doesn't help reinvent the party or further the cause.
    Corrupt and unethical? Kinda like the guy who owns a carbon cap and trading firm pushing for carbon cap and trade regulations by the government? The government giving out money at all is corrupt and unethical.

    OH and as for how much the oceans are going to go up - the answer is a few centimeters at most - NOT the 6 feet that AL Gore and the extreme alarmists claim. Anyone who knows anything about history knows that.

    BTW - how did you disprove the fact that cyclonic activity is at a 30 year low? I seem to have missed that . . . .
    Last edited by PoliCon; 03-23-2009 at 04:58 PM.
    Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally Posted by PoliCon View Post
    Corrupt and unethical? Kinda like the guy who owns a carbon cap and trading firm pushing for carbon cap and trade regulations by the government? The government giving out money at all is corrupt and unethical.

    OH and as for how much the oceans are going to go up - the answer is a few centimeters at most - NOT the 6 feet that AL Gore and the extreme alarmists claim. Anyone who knows anything about history knows that.

    BTW - how did you disprove the fact that cyclonic activity is at a 30 year low? I seem to have missed that . . . .
    1- I agree on carbon cap trading-- it's going to get messy.

    2 - Regarding, the "few centimeters" claim--you wouldn't mind posting your source?

    3 - On the cyclonic activity 30-year low-- I never proposed to disprove the study, only question it's interpretation in the OP and by Drudge. Here's what I base that on:

    (from the study)

    This should not be a surprise to scientists since the natural variability in climate dominates any detectable or perceived global warming impact when it comes to measuring yearly integrated tropical cyclone activity. With the continuation (persistence) of colder Pacific tropical sea-surface temperatures associated with the effects of La Nina, the upcoming 2009 Atlantic hurricane season should be above average, as we saw in 2008.
    If the OP had stated that this study calls into question Al Gore's alarmist predictions re: increased TC activity, then I'd agree. But the study in no way shows the scientific consensus re: climate to be a lie, con, myth, etc. It's merely data. It shows a recent drop in activity, not unprecedented, just something to be noted. Drudge uses all kinds of colored fonts and sizes to imply some sort of smoking gun proof.

    Also, as part of the scientific process, this study--data, conclusions, etc. will be reviewed over the next year by others in the same field of research and they will publish their review of the study. It's a process that's much longer than most people understand.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    CU's Tallest Midget! PoliCon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    25,328
    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post

    2 - Regarding, the "few centimeters" claim--you wouldn't mind posting your source?
    You mean besides common sense? :p Welp lets see. How much do you know about history?
    Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally Posted by PoliCon View Post
    You mean besides common sense? :p Welp lets see. How much do you know about history?
    So, let me see if I understand. You ask that I site sources and answer your questions. I make an effort to explain what I meant and quote directly from the source mentioned in the OP.

    Then I ask you to back your claim and...

    Well, there you have it...

    Historically speaking, when a person gives a smart ass non-answer to a legitimate question, it's likely that they're desperately trying to save face and leave the conversation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    CU's Tallest Midget! PoliCon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    25,328
    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    So, let me see if I understand. You ask that I site sources and answer your questions. I make an effort to explain what I meant and quote directly from the source mentioned in the OP.

    Then I ask you to back your claim and...

    Well, there you have it...

    Historically speaking, when a person gives a smart ass non-answer to a legitimate question, it's likely that they're desperately trying to save face and leave the conversation.
    Answer the fucking question rino - you want my answer - I'll give it my way. :mad:
    Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally Posted by PoliCon View Post
    Answer the fucking question rino - you want my answer - I'll give it my way. :mad:
    Indeed... You and Frank Sinatra.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    CU's Tallest Midget! PoliCon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    25,328
    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Indeed... You and Frank Sinatra.
    so my pseudo-conservative "friend" are you going to answer the question? What do you know about history? I'll even go one better - what do you know about medieval history??
    Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •