Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooling

[fryewe]

Originally Posted by fryewe

I'm assuming the HFCs in inhalers must be propellents for which there are adequate substitutes. Guess I'll have to break into a sweat Googling it to find out.

From the epa.gov website - https://www.epa.gov/snap/substitutes...ol-propellants

Substitutes in Aerosol Propellants

Substitutes are reviewed on the basis of environmental and health risks, including factors such as ozone depletion potential, global warming potential, toxicity, flammability, and exposure potential.

Lists of acceptable and unacceptable - Unacceptable - This designation means that it is illegal to use a product as a substitute for an ODS in a specific end-use.

For example, HCFC-141b is an unacceptable substitute for CFC-11 in building chillers. Note that all SNAP determinations apply to the use of a specific product as a substitute for a specific ODS in a specific end-use. substitutes are updated several times each year. The list of acceptable substitutes are shown below.

Among the list of acceptable substitutes...CO2...bwaa-haaa-haaa

[Exile]

Quote:
And the use of hydrofluorocarbons is growing. Already, the HFCs used in ...inhalers, and other items are emitting an entire gigaton of carbon dioxide-equivalent pollution into the atmosphere annually...

Thanks to these threads, I now get a little suspicious when I read alarmist talk that describes emissions in dramatic numbers like a "gigaton." And what's "CO2-equivalent pollution?" Maybe another type of GHG?

I can understand reasonable people getting concerned when hearing alarmist talk about melting ice caps, bleached coral reefs, and of course rising seas, but trying to equate MMGW with ISIS?? I guess some of these people in high places are so insulated from reality they don't realize how ridiculous this sort of rhetoric sounds. Maybe L-E will come up with something showing that Kerry's comments weren't as dumb as they are being reported. That would actually be somewhat of a relief.

[fryewe]

And what's "CO2-equivalent pollution?" Maybe another type of GHG?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_equivalent

Two methods of calculating equivalence are in the article. The term Global Warming Potential is used. Sometimes I think potential is all there is. I wonder if warmists will, in a few decades, sit around all melancholy talking about global warming like relatives do when a bright kid doesn't develop intellectually or in good character..."...he had such potential!...", if AGW lets them down with only a fraction of a degree rise and CO2 is 1000 ppm.

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

That's the grand Irony...
Just like how evangelical Christians can turn people in their attempts to convert people, so do the MMGW Cultists turn people off by their approach.

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

The Lie is exposed Folks...
Climate Scientists: Antarctic Temperatures Cooling Every Year Since 1998

Antartic Temps have actually been Cooling every year since 1998!

You can't make this stuff up, the science and data say one thing, but the MMGW Cultists say a complete different thing.

Hilarious Rich...first you compare the religious right extremist to the Climate change folks...then attach a extremist radical right wing rag to prove the planet is cooling. I've posted this site for you before... Weekly World News | The World's Only Reliable News ...You should read that...right up your alley.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

Hilarious Rich...first you compare the religious right extremist to the Climate change folks...then attach a extremist radical right wing rag to prove the planet is cooling. I've posted this site for you before... Weekly World News | The World's Only Reliable News ...You should read that...right up your alley.

Are evangelicals necessarily religious right wing extremists? I thought the comparison btwn. their way of thinking to the more diehard CC advocates/zealots was more about similarities in both groups' intolerance for other viewpoints as opposed to political persuasion.

The evidence of Antarctic cooling was reported in Brietbart but sourced from the science journal Nature, one that is frequently relied on by the AGW advocates around here. I quoted the full para. directly from the article in Nature above.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by fryewe

From the epa.gov website - https://www.epa.gov/snap/substitutes...ol-propellants



Among the list of acceptable substitutes...CO2...bwaa-haaa-haaa

Originally Posted by fryewe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_equivalent

Two methods of calculating equivalence are in the article. The term Global Warming Potential is used. Sometimes I think potential is all there is. I wonder if warmists will, in a few decades, sit around all melancholy talking about global warming like relatives do when a bright kid doesn't develop intellectually or in good character..."...he had such potential!...", if AGW lets them down with only a fraction of a degree rise and CO2 is 1000 ppm.

More than a little ironic that some seem so immersed in their "cause" that they often lose sight of the obvious fact that AGW letting them down is a big win for their blessed Planet Gia! The issues surrounding MMGW attract some odd ideas for some reason, to the point of being amusing at times.

[fryewe]

Clarity of thought can be dangerous to MMGW memes...

From Donald Kasper, commenter at WUWT, re why predictions using graphical depictions of sea ice extent vs time are illogical - as are most AGW plots that use time as the independent variable...

Statistics is for dependent variables. X is the independent variable. Y is the dependent variable, and is dependent on X.

The function is then Y = f(X), Y is a function of X. That is the basis of linear regression and correlation coefficient for that line or any other function.

So, X is time and Y is ice extent or volume. PIOMASS and others have fit a function to this line. Okay, is ice a function of time? Does time make ice? No. Okay, so the trend has no meaning. This is why these predictions keep failing.

They are correlating independent variables. This is also why all X values for these kinds of predictions are time, because if X was something that actually correlated to Y, then they would have discovered a causative agent to study.

Also note, if X is CO2, which is supposed to drive climate, the correlations of dependent Y variables such as ice and temperature are very low, indicating random noise.

So, we know why the Al Gore, et al. statistical predictions failed–time does not make ice, and CO2 is not strongly correlated to temperature for purposes of public policy. I would put a correlation coefficient minima at 0.7 for causative correlations sufficiently strong for purposes of public policy.

In other words, they have no concept of how statistics works. It was not designed to operate on independent variables. It also proves why prediction of this type cannot work. They must fail, and we know why they will.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by fryewe

Journalists and journ-o-lists make their money stirring the pot (looking for the tempest). Facts are not always of interest to them, and I'm not sure any other story in the MSM would include Kerry's complete comments. Maybe the signing was on C-Span and you can view it there.

Originally Posted by newhaul

LE there are so many I can't decide which to link to so here ya go a Google start for ya to do your homework with john kerry air conditioners are bad - Google Search

Oh I did, before I asked, thanks all the same. But you're helping me make my point: Kerry never said "AIR CONDITIONERS AS BIG A THREAT AS ISIS". And the list makes pretty clear the slant and intent of the "news" sites that did pick it up.

Now, the one quote given:

“As we were working together on the challenge of [ISIS] and terrorism,” Kerry said. “It’s hard for some people to grasp it, but what we–you–are doing here right now is of equal importance because it has the ability to literally save life on the planet itself.”

...is not terribly well-calibrated as a public utterance, given the recent spate of ISIS-inspired lone-wolf attacks. Terrorist attacks in "safe" places are intended to grab headlines, to create chaos and fear that's orders of magnitude greater than the actual numbers of dead and injured would actually command.

But, in context, Kerry was providing some encouragement and thanks to people working on the unglamorous but also important work of regulating a potentially harmful substance. And, Kerry is not wrong. From a strictly actuarial point of view terrorism and/or ISIS is still way, way down on the list of things that kill or harm people, especially in the first world. Don't make me list them.

Originally Posted by fryewe
Another example that erodes the credibility of the "mainstream" AGW policy arguments:

I have to respond that, no, it's another example of someone citing a crap article from crap "news" sites who make no attempt to hide their agenda and political leaning. You lie with dogs, you'll get fleas. The headline, the sites that picked up the story - it's more evidence that a knee-jerk anti-green, anti-AGW position is a catechism, a dogma of the right. Citing this stuff certainly erodes someone's credibility.

[fryewe]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Now, the one quote given:
...is not terribly well-calibrated as a public utterance...

And no one should think that the State Department, whose raison d'etre (see what I did there?) is making well-calibrated public utterances (well, besides that whole thing about the inspiration of a youtube video, I guess) should be held responsible for calibrating its public utterances.

...Kerry is not wrong. From a strictly actuarial point of view terrorism and/or ISIS is still way, way, way, way down on the list of things that kill or harm people, especially in the first world. Don't make me list them.

From an actuarial point of view? Heh. Go ahead and list them. Compare the data...those shot, bombed, or maimed by inhaler propellent or refrigerants...and by terrorists. Or the data developed by actuaries that lists the numbers killed by AGW...you know, the numbers they actually use when underwriting my life insurance.

...it's another example of someone citing a crap article from crap sites who make no attempt to hide their agenda and political leaning. You lie with dogs, you'll get fleas. The headline, the sites that picked up the story - it's more evidence that a knee-jerk anti-green, anti-AGW position is a catechism, a dogma of the right. Citing this stuff certainly erodes someone's credibility.

You mad, bro? The good news for you is that there are only five stages of grief, and you're already on the second...bargaining and depression are next...and the final one is acceptance...a destination not too far away, L-E, if you'll just open up your mind.

[fryewe]

I'm just going to drop this in here, because I didn't know it. Perhaps everyone else does, but here you go anyway:

While methane is certainly a greenhouse gas, its effect on climate is negligible. Doesn’t McKibben know that naturally occurring atmospheric water vapor not only overlaps the relevant infrared absorption bands of methane, but also is about 10,000 times more abundant?

- S. FRED SINGER ARLINGTON, VA - The writer is emeritus professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia and was the founding director of the US weather satellite service.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by fryewe

And no one should think that the State Department, whose raison d'etre (see what I did there?) is making well-calibrated public utterances (well, besides that whole thing about the inspiration of a youtube video, I guess) should be held responsible for calibrating its public utterances.

let's actually get the whole speech maybe, then make the call?

From an actuarial point of view? Heh. Go ahead and list them. Compare the data...those shot, bombed, or maimed by inhaler propellent or refrigerants...and by terrorists. Or the data developed by actuaries that lists the numbers killed by AGW...you know, the numbers they actually use when underwriting my life insurance.

Injuries and deaths from oil and gas extraction? Coal mining?
Air pollution?
Lac-Mégantic?
...need more?

Away from oil and gas... how about 25,000 deaths annually in the US from falls? Approx 600 accidental shooting deaths in the US per year?

There are many uninteresting and banal preventable causes of death that kill orders of magnitude more people than terrorism. Terrorism must be eradicated... but reducing these other risks, as boring as they are, have a pretty big payback as well. Shame on Kerry for recognizing that, I guess.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Secretary of State Kerry is a joke.
The Nuke Bomb Iran is going to get under the "deal" will cause more Global Warming than all the Air Conditioning units combined.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

Hilarious Rich...first you compare the religious right extremist to the Climate change folks...then attach a extremist radical right wing rag to prove the planet is cooling. I've posted this site for you before... Weekly World News | The World's Only Reliable News ...You should read that...right up your alley.

Not Hilarious at all.
You have to understand the anatomy of a Great Forum Post....let me help.

See you have to be gentle with these MMGW Cultists or you risk hurting them emotionally. So rather than posting the link to the Scientific Journal that the data and story came out of "Nature" I posted the link to Britbart as a safety hatch...a emotional and religious relief valve if you will.

That way, just as you have done, it will give those who otherwise would be trapped in a corner and face an internal Religious Dogma Meltdown, a way out. Attack the link, while ignoring the Data and Science behind the link. But mission accomplished because the seed of truth has been planted and if watered and nurtured, can grow and bring the Cultists out of darkness to see the light of truth. Rome wasn't built in a day...you have got to give a Cultist Time to decompress.

It's an old physiological trick of a good psychotherapist, to never trap and corner someone or they risk a breakdown, so you need to give them a release. I know it's extremely caring and compassionate of me to plan my posts in such a way to consider the emotional scars and damage the Truth can do to a MMGW Cultist, but hey...that's just the type of guy I am!

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Secretary of State Kerry is a joke.
The Nuke Bomb Iran is going to get under the "deal" will cause more Global Warming than all the Air Conditioning units combined.

This Iran deal? Thanks for reminding us that this thread is little more than political choir-practice.

I was about to congratulate you for being able to post without once saying "MMGW cultists" ... but then you slipped another one in quick-like. You rascal you.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

This Iran deal? Thanks for reminding us that this thread is little more than political choir-practice.

La...la...lala...la la...sing along with me.
This thread purely for entertainment purposes and it's great.