Rand Paul for prez

Discussion in 'Non Surf Related' started by worsey, Apr 8, 2015.

  1. aka pumpmaster

    aka pumpmaster Well-Known Member

    Apr 30, 2008
    plus bias can be built into models
  2. brewengineer

    brewengineer Well-Known Member

    Jun 22, 2011
    There are thousands of studies related to this. Many of them are peer reviewed. I have read maybe 50, and seen no questionable interpretations. I am also not educated enough to be a peer reviewer (and I am guessing you are in the same boat). I also think you are misinterpreting the meaning of observational research. Observational is all correlation and non-experimental. There has been a lot of work done on this subject, not just through correlation studies. http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm
    And even more experiments to prove impacts are already occurring.

    Anyway, I have to leave this debate for today. It is time to leave this hell hole known as Detroit and get back to the coast.

  3. Tlokein

    Tlokein Well-Known Member

    Oct 12, 2012
    Safe travels Brew. Hopefully you aren't missing a tail light on the drive home.


    Sep 17, 2013
    I think the science on 'global environmental climate change' is politicized and used as social control (carbon credits, be green, etc). I am not saying is wrong or bad, but does get twisted by lying liar politicos

    however tlok had a good point and Id like to expand on its about rate of change

    fossil fuels were created by trees photosynthesizing and pulling co2 out of the atmosphere to form long chain carbohydrates. this process has been pulling co2 out of the atmosphere for 1,000,000,000 years

    1 billion years to save up the 'carbon' from atmosphere and sequester it underground

    now we are pulling it up and burning it MUCH FASTER than it was saved, maybe 500 years spending it?
    thats a 10 million fold difference in saving/spending and that fast increase in carbon concentration in the atmosphere will affect feedback cycles in the atmosphere all over the world

    not to mention, the ocean will absorb it and acidify

    and, spending faster than saving results in an empty bank account

    its complex issue that cant be boiled down to a soundbite

    dey tuk r jebs!
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2015
  5. cepriano

    cepriano Well-Known Member

    Apr 20, 2012
    since we are back on global warming,i read a good point the other day that somehow I forgot about what was so simple.

    its not that we all need queefin prius's,and green shopping bags.the problem is the deforestation,don't know if I spelled that right,but cutting down trees.trees are basically the lungs of earth,they suck in all the c02,and when theres nothing to suck that co2 up,climate changes.i saw a video recently,not even posted by a surfer,but the deforestation going on in Indonesia.they are completely wiping out forests/jungles,its shocking shyt to see.

    and anyone who ever grew something indoors knows the power of co2.u beef your plants up by giving them co2.so with all this extra co2 u have big azz poison ivy plants,big bushes full of ticks,etc.its not "everyones driving on burning dinosaur bones" we need to worry about but rather these big corps tearing down the jungles to build infrastructure.i was a believer,then I wasn't,and now I am again.
  6. JayD

    JayD Well-Known Member

    Feb 6, 2012
    Serious question: Why did they change the "push" for Global Warming awareness to Climate Change? I have always been split on this issue. On the one hand, we put some dirty sh*& in the environment/atmosphere and on the other, the climate has changed since the beginning of time.
  7. mucker

    mucker Well-Known Member

    Dec 19, 2008
    It's because people confuse "climate" with "weather." Weather and climate are two different things. Weather is what happens on a daily basis in a specific location and climate is what happens over an extended period of time over a larger geographic area.
  8. chicharronne

    chicharronne Well-Known Member

    Jun 22, 2006
  9. pussy

    pussy Well-Known Member

    Mar 19, 2015
    That's right the President could be a surfer. I see his face on every surf publication around the world, it would sell a lot of magazines too.
  10. Barry Cuda

    Barry Cuda Guest

    The change was made for the exact reason the "scientific creationism" was changed to 'intelligent design". They are losing the argument, scientifically and politically.
    As for myself, no side has "won". Climate has been changing back and force for eons. If we view the data in the time scale of geologic change, the data from the industrial revolution to now, seems trivial at worst. Have humans added to CO2?? Sure. Is it going to bring on Armageddon?/ Nobody can predict the future. Maybe the climate will start to cool soon. Will we disappear? Of course we will--you are but one of a million species present on Earth; they all die out- so will you. Will it be due to climate change? meh...who knows?
    Should we keep the place clean?? Of course--who wants to live in a sty.