Author |
Message |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Gregtonn
| Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 07:26 pm: |
|
There are those who say we are changing the global temp. If you think we can change it what do you think it should be, and where? G |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Britchri10
| Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 07:47 pm: |
|
Temperate, wherever I am. Chris C |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Aesquire
| Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 08:06 pm: |
|
About 2-4 degrees warmer than it is now. That's what it was a thousand years ago, when the Norsemen traded, explored and fought across Europe, into what is now Russia, with colonies in Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland. Also a population explosion in Europe, caused by a major increase in food production, due to good weather. ( leading to the renaissance, the end of the dark ages, and civilization rising again in Europe after the fall of Rome ) Simply, what we really want is what the Global Cooling Deniers like the Anglia CRU keep screaming we're all going to die from. Seriously. I have documentation. Warmer weather is good for humans, up to a point. It's also very very hard to actually measure the average temperature. Best guess to date is we had a .02 deg C peak in 1998 ( nearly as warm as 1932 ) and it's been downhill ever since. Since the Ice Age is coming for certain ( but when is not ) I'm all for holding it off a few more decades. So if we actually could deliberately change planetary temperatures, ( and we can't ) I'd vote for 2-4 deg warmer. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Aesquire
| Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 08:22 pm: |
|
Correction: we theoretically could deliberately change the Earths average temp, but it would require a level of violence and authoritarian control that many here would find unacceptable. Example, if we used a portion of our nuclear arsenal to burn most cities in Asia and the Pacific in enormous firestorms we could speed the cooling process with the smoke and high altitude dust. Also the sudden lack of industry in China and Indonesia would reduce the use of fossil fuels and also speed up the cooling trend after the radioactive death clouds finally dispersed by reducing the small particulate level. ( yeah, more dust cooling and less dust cooling seems wrong, but we're talking different size & effect particles. ) More expensive, but better in a moral sense, ( and way smarter overall, which is why I mention it second, since I find it less likely ) would be to make thousands of square kilometers of orbital solar collectors and mirrors to beam power back to Earth and to heat or cool selected areas as needed. An example would be to gently warm Orange Groves to prevent freezing, or shade selected areas to reduce drought effects. Perhaps an ice free and bright evening for the Superbowl. In Minnesota. The problem with the smart approach is: 1. we aren't yet smart enough to accurately predict the results without far more experimentation. It's a chaotic and massive system. 2. There is a real danger of misuse. The problem with the dumb approach is: 1. the whole mortal soul bit. 2. There is a real danger of misuse. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Ft_bstrd
| Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 08:25 pm: |
|
I hate winter. Turn the heat up on that mofo! |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Aesquire
| Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 08:49 pm: |
|
From http://jerrypournelle.com/jerrypournelle.c/chaosma nor/ "In 535 AD, Belisarius subdued the Goths, but the year was a year of world disaster. A large volcano, probably Krakatoa, erupted and spewed enough gunk into the atmosphere that the next decade was one of drastic cooling. There were also plagues. The period after is generally known as the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages officially began forty years before when the Goths deposed the last Western Emperor, but in fact Gothic rule in Italy wasn’t a lot different from what it had been under the last of the Roman Emperors. It was also about then that the “Roman Warm” climatic period is considered to have ended and a period of global cooling began; but the beginning of the cooling isn’t so certain. What is certain is that something horrible happened in 535 which ushered in a long period of cooling, shorter growing seasons, plagues, tribal wanderings, and the real Dark Ages, if you define a Dark Age not as a time when you have forgotten how to do something, but have forgotten that anyone ever was able to do it. As with the US in education, where we have forgotten what we used to accomplish with the public schools, and now strive to achieve goals that would have been considered failure by most teachers over most of the period of the public schools. But I digress. Fortunately the Dark Age Cooling ended, and the Earth began to warm again, producing the Viking Warm period with colonies in Greenland, grapes in Vinland (AKA Nova Scotia) and longer growing seasons across Europe and China. The Viking Warm was followed by the cooling that began in 1325 or so and led into the Little Ice Age which lasted until Earth began to warm again in 1800. There was a time when longer growing seasons, warmer winters, and farmlands in higher latitudes were considered a blessing. But that’s another story." Ft_ I'm in agreement. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Aesquire
| Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 09:17 pm: |
|
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12/06/ramsdorf_f oster_still_warming_no_really/ I'm still waiting for the computer model that can predict last year. ( given all available data up until last year ) When you can predict the past, I'll begin to believe you might be able to predict the future. Until then, uber-precise predictions within .01 deg C over a century are best used in Syfy bad disaster movies, not public policy. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Mr_grumpy
| Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2011 - 05:31 am: |
|
Concur!! Oh yeah, & same as Chris, temperate wherever I am. I'll fix that when I win the lottery by doing it the other way round & being wherever it's temperate. (Message edited by Mr_grumpy on December 11, 2011) |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Aesquire
| Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2011 - 07:24 am: |
|
http://www.infowars.com/un-calls-for-eco-fascist-w orld-government-at-durban-summit/ http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/10/us-clima te-idUSTRE7B41NH20111210 ..... The treaty calls for the west to achieve a 50% CO2 emissions reduction within the next eight years, a feat that would completely bankrupt the global economy and spark a new great depression, as well as a “more than 100%” reduction by 2050, which presumably could only be accomplished by killing billions of humans to prevent them from exhaling carbon dioxide. “So, no motor cars, no coal-fired or gas-fired power stations, no aircraft, no trains. Back to the Stone Age, but without even the right to light a carbon-emitting fire in your caves,” writes Monckton. - The text calls for a 2 degree Celsius drop in global temperatures, which as Monckton points out “would kill hundreds of millions” and herald a new ice age. - The reduction in CO2 concentration the text calls for would actually begin to kill all plant life and trees on the planet because they need levels of carbon dioxide above 210 ppmv to survive. - All military forces would be abolished because they contribute to climate change. Presumably the United Nations would then take on the role of world army to police the globe. - The process will be enforced by an “International Climate Court of Justice” under a bureaucracy of world government that will force western nations to pay “climate debt,” as well as reparations to third world nations to pay for carbon cuts that wouldn’t be as drastic. The burden of “historical responsibility” has been applied to industrialized nations, implying they are guilty for whatever the weather decides to do and must be punished for it. - All the money will be collected by the UN and whatever is left after they have taken their considerable cut will be doled out according to the wishes of UN bureaucrats. “As a senior UN diplomat told me last year, “The UN exists for only one purpose: to get more money. That, and that alone, is the reason why it takes such an interest in climate change,” writes Monckton. - Environmental enforcement arms of the UN will be given the power of a global government in the name of fighting climate change. “The draft “agrees that common principles, modalities and procedures as well as the coordinating and oversight functions of the UNFCarolina Corner Carvers are needed” – in short, global centralization of political, economic and environmental power in the manicured hands of the Convention’s near-invisible but all-powerful secretariat. No provision is made for the democratic election of key members of the all-powerful secretariat – in effect, a world government – by the peoples of our planet,” writes Monckton. - This world government will mandate that western nations submit reports every two years on their progress and then implement the measures demanded by the world government. - The UN will create several new slush funds from which to enrich its coffers, including a tax on shipping and aviation fuel, a new “green climate fund” and a worldwide cap and trade. Most of the costs will be handed down to taxpayers. This merely scratches the surface of what the UN is trying to include in its “legally-binding treaty,” which represents eco-fascism on steroids. Despite press reports that the text is once again likely to be rejected, Monckton points out that UN bureaucrats are confident they can get some form of deal rammed through on this occasion. To achieve the solution to the Climate Crisis, a ban on all personal weapons is required. Having peasants shoot back at the UN troops taking away your wealth at gunpoint sort of ruins the elegance of a world government, not elected by anyone, with no checks and balances, with no responsibilities, just power. ( much like the fine examples of the Taliban and Saddam's Iraq ) Answerable to no one. Especially you peasants. Kneel. Yeah, I'm a temperate kinda guy too. Walking all day in 20 deg F weather is less than happy making. If this treaty has the desired results.... 2 deg C drop in temperature, expect mass famine and massacres as the UN World Government decides who gets the food, ( them ) and who must die so they may live in luxury. Then again, I've long thought we should turn the UN building into low income housing. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Ft_bstrd
| Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2011 - 09:12 am: |
|
The good thing about the coming global conflict is that we could see as much as a 50% reduction in world population. Dead people have a very small carbon footprint. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Hybridmomentspass
| Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2011 - 12:31 pm: |
|
If I could choose _ I'd like for it to be 70 for the lows, and highs around 85, maybe hitting 90 rarely. And that should last about 10 months of the year. For the other two months - I want it 20* all day long, with an average snowfall of 6" per day. And one inch of ice, on average, per day. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Kenm123t
| Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2011 - 07:07 pm: |
|
UN should be turned in to a museum of dead political theories. A few libs to be kept in cages with the warning these are evil study them and dont allow them to live among you! Root the scourge off the planet! |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Strokizator
| Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2011 - 08:08 pm: |
|
I'm fine with the temps here in Calif. What I'd like to manipulate is precipitation. More rain in the deserts, snow in the mountains. Enough water for farmers and enviro-nazis (but I'm sure they'd find something else to kvetch about). It's a fine line. Too little water and the trails are one big dust bowl. Too much water and they wash away. Oh yeah, in my world it only rains on Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Ft_bstrd
| Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2011 - 08:43 pm: |
|
"Global Warming" has NEVER been about the weather or saving the planet. It's about control. That and about profits to the purveyors of environmental conscious products and the profits of green religion. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Xl1200r
| Posted on Monday, December 12, 2011 - 10:54 am: |
|
From what I've read and looked at, the "stable" average global temperature has been around 20-22 degrees Celcius for the last 600 million years, with occasional dips for the ice ages down to about 12 degrees celcius. Historically speaking, we are still coming out of an ice age with an average global temp not much above 12 degrees. More interesting? There is ZERO correlation between CO2 level and temperature on this time scale, and in fact CO2 levels today are among the lowest they've been in this time period. On a shorter time scale, in the hundreds of the thousands of years (as opposed to millions), there is a direct correlation between temperature changes and CO2 levels. But what you'll see is that over the last 400,000 years, the temperature has largely only dropped and not recovered much if at all when CO2 levels came up. BTW - if someone can explain to me all of this temp change and CO2 level changes WITHOUT soccer mom's driving SUVs, I'll give them a cookie. Cambrian period. ~500 million years ago. All land was essentially desert. CO2 levels were 4500ppm (11 times what they are today), temps were about 7 degrees warmer and there ware essentially no polar ice caps. The Earth changes, with or without us. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Kyrocket
| Posted on Monday, December 12, 2011 - 02:01 pm: |
|
"Oh yeah, in my world it only rains on Tuesdays and Thursdays." From 2 to 5:30 am. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Aesquire
| Posted on Monday, December 12, 2011 - 09:04 pm: |
|
BTW - if someone can explain to me all of this temp change and CO2 level changes WITHOUT soccer mom's driving SUVs, I'll give them a cookie Pt 1. Volcanoes and meteors. Volcanoes is obvious. A meteor strike or bolide explosion mid air ( Tunguska ) can burn vast swaths of forest & grasslands. Swamps too. Pt 2. The oceans act as a CO2 sink. When cold they hold more CO2, and when they warm they release it back into the air. Like a warm Pepsi. There is also the formation of limestone and coral reefs that use CO2 and calcium to bottle up CO2 for extended periods. Usually the CO2 is only released from limestone and coral after it dries completely out... and is heated. Today mostly in turning calcium carbonate into cement. There is some evidence that the current CO2 levels are a rise after warming and not before. Those data points have been heavily massaged by the CRU guys. If you alter the theory to fit the data, that's Science. If you alter the data to fit the theory...... That's a con. Or politics. ( arguably the same thing. ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok_420ky_4cu rves_insolation.jpg The temperature changes I can explain... but people would get bored. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles |
|