Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 11-07-2016, 12:51   #2206
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,513
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by Celestialsailor View Post
Actually denier is ok. That is what's happening Rich, on both sides. It's not like you are being called an extremist even though it might be accurate. People just want to be treated with respect. Not much to ask really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by senormechanico View Post
I don't mind being called a skeptic, but DO mind being called a denier.
I suggest you revisit your conclusion after reading below:


From thesaurus.com
skeptic


or sceptic


Noun

1. a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.

denier



noun 1. a person who denies.

-------------------------------

The former indicated conscious thought processes, whereas the latter does not.

And denier presumes that the many facets of CC science are factual and settled, when most who have even a cursory understanding of the science understand why much of it is neither. Instead, most of the media and the politicians purport to present it as factual and settled, so those who challenge it should be more accurately and honestly described as skeptics as SenorM's definition points out. This is why the science is so often compared to the scientific certainty surrounding tobacco use, or the scientific laws of gravity, evolution, heliocentrism, etc. Hence the propaganda value of "denier" and "flat-lander" labels, as opposed to more honestly and accurately calling those who question and challenge mainstream & alarmist views as "skeptics."

So no CS, I respectfully disagree that the term denier is in any way respectful.
__________________

__________________
Exile is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 13:24   #2207
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,513
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by fryewe View Post
How long before someone says the cold air being carried south from the Arctic is an indication of how we've screwed up the wind patterns with...ta-da!!!...AGW?

Is the melting sea ice in the Arctic contributing to these wind patterns?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackdale View Post
Funny you should ask

Quote:
Earth has seen some highly unusual weather patterns over the past three years, and three new studies published this year point to Arctic sea loss as a potential important driver of some of these strange weather patterns. The record loss of sea ice the Arctic in recent years may be increasing winter cold surges and snowfall in Europe and North America, says a study by a research team led by Georgia Institute of Technology scientists Jiping Liu and Judith Curry. The paper, titled "Impact of declining Arctic sea ice on winter snowfall", was published on Feb. 27, 2012 in the online early edition of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "Our study demonstrates that the decrease in Arctic sea ice area is linked to changes in the winter Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation, said Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, in a press release. "The circulation changes result in more frequent episodes of atmospheric blocking patterns, which lead to increased cold surges and snow over large parts of the northern continents."

https://www.wunderground.com/blog/Je...?entrynum=2065
The obvious implication, of course, is that AGW has created these supposedly "unusual" weather patterns by causing the melting sea ice, even though the article never makes that connection, and Judith Curry is well known to theorize that natural forces are probably more responsible than AGW. But it's the implication that counts I guess.

But the article at least provides some context for what is yet another highly uncertain area of climate science, but you have to read a little further past the part that Jack quoted:

Quote:
Obviously, loss of Arctic sea ice is not having the same impact each winter; such factors as El Nio/La Nia, the phase of the 11-year sunspot cycle, and the amount of snow cover in Siberia also have strong influences on the winter weather pattern that sets up. Cold air is less likely to spill out of the Arctic during a solar maximum, as we are now headed towards, so this factor may tend to reduce the odds of getting big cold blasts in the U.S. during the coming two winters. However, cold air may be more likely to spill out of the Arctic in winter due to the decades-long pattern of warming and cooling of Atlantic Ocean waters known as the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). A 2012 study by NASA scientists found that the warm phase of the AMO (like we have been in since 1995) causes more instances of atmospheric blocking, where the jet stream gets "stuck" in place, leading to long periods of extreme weather. It will be interesting to see how all these factors play out in the coming years. If these three newly-published studies are correct, the U.S. should see more winters like 2010 - 2011 and 2009 - 2010 in coming decades, as Arctic sea ice continues to melt and affect global atmospheric circulation patterns more strongly.


I'm reading lots of "ifs," "mays," uncertainties about past cause & effect, and not much more than educated guesses about the future based on many complex yet natural factors (El Nino/La Nina, sunspot cycle, snow cover, AMO). Yet reading Jack's post in response to fryewe's post leaves the implication that AGW is to blame.
__________________

__________________
Exile is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 13:26   #2208
Registered User
 
transmitterdan's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Boat: Valiant 42
Posts: 3,210
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY View Post
So lets reveiw shall we:

Denier is ok...
Cultist is bad...
Go it.

The MMGWC say adding CO2 to the atmosphere in PPM levels will make the earth uninhabitable for humans and cause calamity.
BUT when asked what amount of temp a PPM of CO2 will cause so we can plan or put a compare/contrast list together for said PPM of CO2...well that's complicated, can't model it, but they believe it on faith anyway.
Ok...Got it.

Translation:
We have no idea how much CO2 is bad, but we are going to change the world's economy based on our guess and tax the citizens for "Climate Change" when the history of Climante on the Earth is to...TA-DA...Change.

Sorry, as a scientist myself, that's not how Science works, but it IS how a Religion or Cult works, which is why the phrase MMGWC is so fitting. Facts don't matter, science doesn't matter, only Religion and Faith matter to the Warming Alarmists. The sacrament of climate sin is washed away by the CO2 Credit and Recycling your glass bottles. To deny MMGW is to Deny Gia and her Deity.

Man this thread is fun.....


Denier is not ok if the denial stems from ignorance. But if one knows the scientific facts which are easy to self verify and still denies these facts then it applies. Denying that NASA put a probe in the orbit of Jupiter would be a whacky position to take.

Skeptic is not ok either in my opinion but it isn't derogatory. Just as the term ignorant is not ok but it isn't derogatory. Ignorance just means lack of knowledge.

Acknowledging scientific facts does not make one a worshipper of imaginary deities.

It is accurate to say that no one can predict with high degree of confidence that there will be a specific temperature rise/decrease planet wide for each additional PPM of CO2. It is even harder to predict local changes in climate. The earth is a highly complex nonlinear system with variable inputs. But that inability to accurately predict the future does not invalidate the scientific certainty that the greenhouse effect exists. We know it exists because Earth is habitable by mostly hairless mammals who would freeze to death without the greenhouse effect.

It would take an incredible leap of logic to assume adding more greenhouse gas to the atmosphere will have no effect or that it will for sure decrease air temperatures.

Likewise, there is a lot of evidence that global warming due to man's release of CO2 will not cause a catastrophe. The planet is pretty stable and robust. And human adaptability is a further feedback that helps ensure against catastrophe.

So I am with you that we are most likely not going to destroy ourselves or the planet. But it isn't logical to deny the science behind the greenhouse effect. It is for sure real.
__________________
transmitterdan is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 13:58   #2209
Senior Cruiser
 
jackdale's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 4,946
Images: 1
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by senormechanico View Post
I don't mind being called a skeptic, but DO mind being called a denier.
I suggest you revisit your conclusion after reading below:


From thesaurus.com
skeptic


or sceptic


Noun

1. a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.

denier



noun 1. a person who denies.

-------------------------------

The former indicated conscious thought processes, whereas the latter does not.


How about "contrarian", used by Dana Nuccitelli and some others? Carl Mears of RSS uses "denialist," which has the ring of an ideological stance; that has some truth to it.

Then I am more partial to "climate science affirmer" than I am to "alarmist".
__________________
ISPA Yachtmaster Ocean Instructor Evaluator
Sail Canada Advanced Cruising Instructor
IYT Yachtmaster Coastal Instructor
ASA 201, 203,204, 205, 206, 214
As I sail, I praise God, and care not. (Luke Foxe)
jackdale is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 14:07   #2210
Liveaboard Cruiser
 
SV THIRD DAY's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Morro Bay, CA
Boat: 1978 Hudson Force 50 Ketch
Posts: 3,217
Send a message via Skype™ to SV THIRD DAY
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by transmitterdan View Post
So I am with you that we are most likely not going to destroy ourselves or the planet. But it isn't logical to deny the science behind the greenhouse effect. It is for sure real.
What Science are you referring to? See you throw this phrase out but still even you admit the MMGWC can't define this so called science and how it relates to a temperature increase that is said to destroy man's ability to live, grow crops, raise food and survive. You keep confusing (as many non-scientists do) the basic Greenhouse effect that keeps the planet warm from the MMGW that will kill us all and we need to pay a Carbon tax to prevent. See the Game...you play? To disagree with a clamatous MMGWC agrument, you are then said to be stupid of basic science...I call BS on that. MMGWC don't like to be called out when they claim "science" but then can't even use science properly along with the scientific method to argue their MMGWC case. Then they start calling names...Denier...Witch...Hater...Heretic...Apostat e...etc. IF you can't win the argument go on the attack...right out of the Alynski Rules for Radicals.
__________________
Rich Boren Living Aboard in Morro Bay, CA and the owner of:
Cruise RO Water High Output Water Makers
Technautics CoolBlue Refrigeration

SV THIRD DAY is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 14:41   #2211
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,513
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackdale View Post
How about "contrarian", used by Dana Nuccitelli and some others?

You just convinced me not to use "contrarian" anymore, but I certainly understand why you are drawn to anything Mr. Nuccitelli might have to say:

"Dana Nuccitelli in Sac Bee: 'Now that the science is settled that humans are causing global warming, we need to settle on a policy to solve the problem...With the latest study showing 97% certainty about climate change being caused by human activity, we're 100% certain that Congress needs to pass serious climate legislation such as a revenue-neutral carbon tax."

Carl Mears of RSS uses "denialist," which has the ring of an ideological stance; that has some truth to it.

You just convinced me that Dr. Mears' attempt to label skeptics in a derogatory way means he has more of an ideological stance than just trying to discredit the satellite temp data based on science alone. This helps explain all the thread discussion and then silence on this particular topic.

Then I am more partial to "climate science affirmer" than I am to "alarmist".
I'm not surprised. "Climate science affirmer" presumes that all climate science has a high degree of certainty, and then implies that anyone who is not a skeptic affirms all of it. Another great example of an ideological vs. a fact-based approach, and one which seems (dare I say) cult-like.
__________________
Exile is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 15:07   #2212
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 559
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
"Dana Nuccitelli in Sac Bee: 'Now that the science is settled that humans are causing global warming, we need to settle on a policy to solve the problem...With the latest study showing 97% certainty about climate change being caused by human activity, we're 100% certain that Congress needs to pass serious climate legislation such as a revenue-neutral carbon tax."
I really like some of the proposals in this article...

Glenn Reynolds: Ban AC for DC

If AGW is the problem it's said to be by The Affirmers (May Gaia's Peace Be Upon Them) then many of these proposals should be heartily accepted.

Where I grew up, a hypocrite was commonly teased to "Put your money where you mouth is." The column says it more eloquently.
__________________
fryewe is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 16:14   #2213
Registered User

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Toronto
Boat: Sandpiper 565
Posts: 2,661
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by adoxograph View Post
You are expecting too much from the participants here, which are mostly blinded by their political believes (left and right) and do not understand the underlying science at all.

The worst thing is both sides do not even try to get a scientifically balanced view, relying only on sources (cut and paste/quoting) confirming their believes (there is no AGW/there is AGW) and consequently ignoring everything that would contradict this believe. Even worse, both sides are discrediting sources, which do not fit in their world view. I think there is a word for that. Ah yes, it is called bias.

This is a thread where the whole argument can be summarised as: "See Prof.Dr.John Doe said it and therefore I'm right and you are an ignorant imbecile/true believer" followed by the counterargument "John Doe is a charlatan, he is not even a Prof. How stupid can you be believing him?"
Well... other than yourself, the regulars here are all essentially "laypersons", yes? In something as complex and specialized as climate science, which has required an almost imponderable number of person-hours from thousands of scientists etc to measure, analyze and model, all of us layfolk must rely on the work of these experts to support our arguments and positions.

So, we're all of us appealing to authority, by necessity. Even a "skeptic" is appealing to the authority of some expert whose work appears to counter the assertion he is claiming to skeptical of.

Mea culpa - the core of my argument remains 99.99% appeal to authority. My argument is simply that when (pick your fave modifier: 97%, just about all, the vast majority, a veritable sh!tload) of the subject matter experts have apparently concluded, after significant effort, that AGW is a thing we need to do something about, and when the UN acknowledges this and has formed the IPCC to try to come up with agreement on the threat and mitigation, and when the majority of the world's leading countries have reviewed and accepted the determinations put out by the IPCC, and when 100% of science organizations who have expressed an opinion have expressed support for this position... well, the standard of proof required to refute such a well-backed position should pretty damn high, shouldn't it?

If the science points were all that was being discussed... But it's not; there has been much effort here and in general directed towards disparaging the individual scientists, their institutions, and the whole field itself. All these were by turns accused of incompetence, dishonesty, fraud, careerism, grant-whoring, collusion, secret political agenda... the US government is signing onto AGW for ulterior reasons, and all its scientific organs - NASA, NOAA, research funding recipients - they are all in on this AGW scam (cult!), dontcha know. Disparaging the field is a much lower bar than countering the science.

So anyway, the CF version of the AGW debate has ossified into... this thread. The few remaining participating regulars have entrenched and well-known positions, yet there's apparently entertainment value to be had by goading opposites into reaction, and then riffing off of that. Rinse and repeat. It's an ill-tempered jam session. Only rules - don't get caught dissing hard be nice, stop linking or pasting, let's not clutter up CF

Quote:
However, this is exactly what makes this thread so entertaining.
My condolences, you must really be hurting for distraction.
__________________
Lake-Effect is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 16:22   #2214
Registered User
 
Reefmagnet's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: puɐןsuǝǝnb 'ʎɐʞɔɐɯ
Boat: Nantucket Island 33
Posts: 2,667
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Dana Nuccitelli is, for all intents, the US representative of Skeptical Science.

And, in just one of literally thousands of examples, when Michael E Mann (who ticks all the boxes regarding being a real climate scientist, yet isn't a marine biologist, AFAIK) comes out with a claim that all the organisms in the oceans are dissolving and that 90% of the Great Barrier Reef has bleached (with inference that it has died) due to climate change - who comes across the more stupid? Is it the "affirmist's" that accept this as fact or the skeptics that call BS?

And don't worry, extreme cold weather events are already well and truly blamed on global warming...

Quote:
Climate Change Might Just Be Driving the Historic Cold Snap


Polar Vortex: Climate Change Could Be the Cause of Record Cold Weather | TIME.com


Quote:
Is global warming causing COLDER winters? Melting ice is destabilising the polar vortex, study claims
Are freezing winters CAUSED by global warming? | Daily Mail Online

Quote:
Many climate scientists believe that natural variations in the climate system are sufficient to explain the frequency of cold spells in recent years. Others suggest these weather phenomena could be influenced by climate change due to the ongoing decreases in arctic sea ice and the faster rate of temperature increase in the arctic compared to lower latitudes. This is an area of intense current research and considerable concern.
What is a polar vortex? | Cornell Climate Change

Quote:
Some researchers suggest that such kinks in the jet stream that allow that cold air to spill out could actually become more common in a warming world because of changes to the environment where that cold air originates the Arctic.
Cold Air Invasion Coming: What’s the Role of Warming? | Climate Central




And good ol' Dr Mann even chimes in...


Quote:
So, is there a climate connection to this strange occurrence? While more study is certainly needed, I have been increasingly impressed by the growing body of evidence supporting the hypothesis that climate change may lead to more persistent meanders in the jet stream. In a world without global warming, the temperature difference between the freezing Arctic and warmer lower latitudes creates a pressure field that confines the jet stream to a relatively tight band around the Arctic, with wave-like meanders characterized by ephemeral "ridges" and "troughs." As the Arctic melts and warms, however, that temperature difference is reduced, and the meanders of the jet stream potentially become more pronounced and more sluggish. The more sluggish and persistent those meanders, the more persistent the patterns of regional warmth where the jet stream pulls warm air northward, and the regional cold where it pulls arctic air south.
Does Polar Vortex Mean 'So Much for Global Warming?' (Op-Ed)
__________________
Reefmagnet is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 17:32   #2215
Registered User
 
transmitterdan's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Boat: Valiant 42
Posts: 3,210
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY View Post
What Science are you referring to? See you throw this phrase out but still even you admit the MMGWC can't define this so called science and how it relates to a temperature increase that is said to destroy man's ability to live, grow crops, raise food and survive. You keep confusing (as many non-scientists do) the basic Greenhouse effect that keeps the planet warm from the MMGW that will kill us all and we need to pay a Carbon tax to prevent. See the Game...you play? To disagree with a clamatous MMGWC agrument, you are then said to be stupid of basic science...I call BS on that. MMGWC don't like to be called out when they claim "science" but then can't even use science properly along with the scientific method to argue their MMGWC case. Then they start calling names...Denier...Witch...Hater...Heretic...Apostat e...etc. IF you can't win the argument go on the attack...right out of the Alynski Rules for Radicals.
I have advocated against name calling so there is no issue on that point. Let us end senseless name calling on all sides.

It is a fact that CO2 retains heat in the atmosphere. More CO2 retains more heat. The exact relationship between temperature and CO2 concentration is not easy to compute if one also has to consider the complexity of an entire planet. So far as I know no one has done that to prove their model is correct. It is unlikely anyone will be able to do so any time soon. Therefore, the people running around saying we are all doomed are not acting in a scientific capacity in my opinion. They are guessing.

It is equally unproved that continuing to increase the CO2 concentration will not have some bad effects. To say that rising CO2 has no bad effect is also guessing. We simply do not know to any high degree of certitude one way or the other.

I strongly encourage everyone to read about carbon tax plans and look past the word tax. Not all taxes are terrible. With zero taxes civilization could not exist. Likewise, with 100% taxation civilization could not exist. There is a fair carbon tax system that would tend to reduce CO2 emissions without harming anyone.
__________________
transmitterdan is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 17:51   #2216
Registered User
 
adoxograph's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsnɐ 'ʇsɐoɔ ǝuıɥsuns
Boat: Landlocked right now, in the marked for a ~50ft cat
Posts: 337
Images: 1
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY View Post
That's a trick question that those without a proper understanding of the 4th Law of Thermodynamics won't have a chance at getting right. Can they Google it...
I wish I would have come up with that one. Brilliant.

Rich this the best posting in this thread. Thanks for that. It made my day. I'm sill laughing.
__________________
As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas, and land on barbarous coasts.
― Herman Melville, Moby-Dick
adoxograph is online now   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 18:11   #2217
Registered User
 
adoxograph's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsnɐ 'ʇsɐoɔ ǝuıɥsuns
Boat: Landlocked right now, in the marked for a ~50ft cat
Posts: 337
Images: 1
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

This thread is real fun!

Why in your right mind would you label yourself or others? Sceptic, Denier, Cultist, Believer, etc.

Guys, science is never settled. The statement "98% of scientist agree" means only that there is a prevailing theory on which scientists agree on right now that this particular theory describes realty best. Because most of scientist are considering a theory as valid at one point in time does not make it true. Just ask Ptolemy. His theory was the prevailing theory for over 1400 years until Galileo and Kepler came along. Or ask Isaac Newton who's prevailing theory of gravity was replaced by Einstein's theories. The list goes on!

A scientist is by definition a curious sceptic. Believing that one knows it all is called religiously following dogma.

Just resolve the equation in my avatar and you have the answer to all your questions!
__________________
As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas, and land on barbarous coasts.
― Herman Melville, Moby-Dick
adoxograph is online now   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 18:36   #2218
Senior Cruiser
 
StuM's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Port Moresby,Papua New Guinea
Boat: FP Belize Maestro 43
Posts: 5,034
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by adoxograph View Post
Just resolve the equation in my avatar and you have the answer to all your questions!

The smaller you are, the closer you get to unity?

When you are nothing, you are one?
__________________
StuM is online now   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 18:44   #2219
Moderator
 
weavis's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: SEVILLE - MALLORCA
Posts: 8,143
Send a message via Skype™ to weavis
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

__________________
- Never test how deep the water is with both feet -
10% of conflicts are due to different opinions. 90% by the tone of voice.
Raise your words, not your voice. It is rain that grows flowers, not thunder.
weavis is offline   Reply
Old 11-07-2016, 18:49   #2220
Liveaboard Cruiser
 
SV THIRD DAY's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Morro Bay, CA
Boat: 1978 Hudson Force 50 Ketch
Posts: 3,217
Send a message via Skype™ to SV THIRD DAY
Re: Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooli

Quote:
Originally Posted by transmitterdan View Post
There is a fair carbon tax system that would tend to reduce CO2 emissions without harming anyone.
But you yourself said you can't link how much CO2 to what temp increase...so any Tax to do what you said can't and hasn't been done yet is what? I will tell you what...a Big Government Scam mi Amigo. You can't like the Tax to reducing the dangers...but you still want the tax why...why because that is what the Govnet hacks do...they want money to feed their Pension Plans...Bingo.
__________________

__________________
Rich Boren Living Aboard in Morro Bay, CA and the owner of:
Cruise RO Water High Output Water Makers
Technautics CoolBlue Refrigeration

SV THIRD DAY is offline   Reply
Closed Thread

Tags
arc, cooling, cruising

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I love cruising because it teaches humility zboss General Sailing Forum 38 17-09-2014 20:38
A Boat Is Better than a Wife, Because . . . BlueWaterSail Off Topic Forum 94 20-02-2011 20:10
Current Strategies in Solar Power ? Roy M Electrical: Batteries, Generators & Solar 47 18-07-2010 06:37
i'm Really a Tiller Guy, because i Like the Responsiveness of a Multihull... Pipeline Multihull Sailboats 2 08-01-2010 08:32
Men return to Mountains and to the Sea because.... JohnnyB Challenges 4 10-10-2008 09:48


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:24.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.