Climate Change

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by Alecadi

In the US we are used to make a common mistake by mixing up Comunism and Socialism which are totally different.

The socialist party in Switzerland still officially strives to eliminate Capitalism and introduce a planned economy. I will not make the mistake not seeing them for what they are...

[foolishsailor]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

If people would be more aware of what socialism is doing to the people it claims to champion it would not be so popular. I know people who grew up in the German Democratic Republic. You have no idea how bad that was.
Socialism is popular in Europe for the same reason the Tea Party is in The US: people are stupid.

What an absurd and ill-informed statement.

The countries with the; highest standard of living in the world, longest lifespan, highest quality of life, lowest unemployment, highest level of education, smallest gap between rich and poor, largest middle class, etc are all "socialist".

They are Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark...the "social democratic" states.

They top the list for almot every criteria listed by WHO and other international bodies in comparison to the rest of the world.

As for the precious US, which I am a citizen, with the exception of military strength they rarely make the top ten.

Last I checked we had the highest level of poverty in the west, largest gap between rich and poor, largest percentage of people not able to meet minimun food requirements, etc...

Good thing those commies didnt get us.

So back to sailing, the US does have better sailing than those Scandi socialists though!

[Alecadi]

Originally Posted by foolishsailor

What an absurd and ill-informed statement.

The countries with the; highest standard of living in the world, longest lifespan, highest quality of life, lowest unemployment, highest level of education, smallest gap between rich and poor, largest middle class, etc are all "socialist".

They are Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark...the "social democratic" states.

They top the list for almot every criteria listed by WHO and other international bodies in comparison to the rest of the world.

As for the precious US, which I am a citizen, with the exception of military strength they rarely make the top ten.

Last I checked we had the highest level of poverty in the west, largest gap between rich and poor, largest percentage of people not able to meet minimun food requirements, etc...

Good thing those commies didnt get us.

So back to sailing, the US does have better sailing than those Scandi socialists though!

Well said!

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by foggysail

I'm done, thanks Mr. Moderator

Foggy and I are just at the bar having a chat, bar room talk thats all. Then well go for a bag of curried chips

dave

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by foolishsailor

What an absurd and ill-informed statement.

The countries with the; highest standard of living in the world, longest lifespan, highest quality of life, lowest unemployment, highest level of education, smallest gap between rich and poor, largest middle class, etc are all "socialist".

They are Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark...the "social democratic" states.

They top the list for almot every criteria listed by WHO and other international bodies in comparison to the rest of the world.

As for the precious US, which I am a citizen, with the exception of military strength they rarely make the top ten.

Last I checked we had the highest level of poverty in the west, largest gap between rich and poor, largest percentage of people not able to meet minimun food requirements, etc...

Good thing those commies didnt get us.

So back to sailing, the US does have better sailing than those Scandi socialists though!

well quality of life indexes are notoriously difficult to correlate , depending ion how absolute income levels are weighted


IN general The top 4 , tend to be picked from , Norway,Sweden,Australia, NZ & Canada,Netherlands etc

heres a map based on the Human development Index.

World Map - Top Ten Countries with Highest Quality of Life

Finland rarely rates by the way, nor does Denmark.

dave

[capngeo]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Foggy and I are just at the bar having a chat, bar room talk thats all. Then well go for a bag of curried chips

dave

I thank you for pointing that out sir, however I did feel the need to intercede before a beer stein bounced off another's cranium!

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by capngeo

I thank you for pointing that out sir, however I did feel the need to intercede before a beer stein bounced off another's cranium!

Me and a few lads from the UK , in a bar in Philly ,when I lived there, we had a typically political discussion and a few beers, all very friendly from our perspective ( you know , youre a w&*ker stuff) , at about 11pm the cops showed up cause the bar owner thought theres was going to be a fight,!!!

Ah cultural differences, in the UK or in many parts of Europe, a fight involves calling the riot squad or the army, not a bunch of blue shirts

dave

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by Bash

Well, there was that whole Carboniferous period when CO2 hit 800 ppm. This was before they invented powerboats, of course.

[capngeo]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Me and a few lads from the UK , in a bar in Philly ,when I lived there, we had a typically political discussion and a few beers, all very friendly from our perspective ( you know , youre a w&*ker stuff) , at about 11pm the cops showed up cause the bar owner thought theres was going to be a fight,!!!

Ah cultural differences, in the UK or in many parts of Europe, a fight involves calling the riot squad or the army, not a bunch of blue shirts

dave

Hmm must be because of the lower carbon levels in the air over there?

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Foggy and I are just at the bar having a chat, bar room talk thats all. Then well go for a bag of curried chips

dave

PEACE

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by Alecadi

We better enjoyed peace than piece, I suppose.

Remember? "This will be very short, just showered and ready for bed."

There are times when POOP happens

[Alecadi]

Originally Posted by foggysail

Remember? "This will be very short, just showered and ready for bed."

There are times when POOP happens

LOL
:-)

[capngeo]

We better enjoyed peace than piece, I suppose.

Reminds me of the 70's... protested for one, prostrated for the other

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by hpeer

OK, so your chart shows the amount of ICE COVER GAIN. it says nothing about the loss of ice in total. It is hardly surprising that once the ice has melted in the summer exposing vast expanses of open water that there will be a significant re freeze in the winter. To present it as a refutation of the arctic ice melt or warming is a gross misinterpretation of the data at best. Lies, damn lies, and statistics....as the saying goes.

Over the past decade nearly all of the old thick multi year ice has been lost. that was thick, dense and nearly salt free. There are satellite animations showing how this ice has been pumping down out of the Fram Straight (east Greenland coast) and leaving the Arctic a chnged place. Neat stuff.

During the winters this old ice is replaced with thin, new, salty ice.. Yes the COVER is restored but not the volume. It is sort of like having a skim of ice on a bucket of water vs. a solid block of frozen water in the bucket. They both have the same COVER BUT they are not the same thing. Sorry, not a real good analogy, but you can get where I'm going.

Below is today's report from the Canadian Ice Service of ice COVER, not the rebound gain.Their site is at Environment Canada - Weather and Meteorology - Current Ice Conditions and Forecasts

From this it should be pretty clear to the most casual observer that things are changing, fast.

Good points on the thickness of the ice vs. its extent.

I don't know of anyone who doubts the earth is warming. The question is whether the nostrums proposed by AGW fans make any sense. Because ocean temperatures have been rising for centuries since the end of the last cyclical cold period in the 18th century, it makes sense that ice levels would be reduced. But as the graph below shows for the oldest set of records available - the Central England Temperature dataset - the trend towards warming has been going on since records began being kept in 1659 and the increase today is nothing unusual. Note how straight the mean temperature line is in the graph. No one in their right mind would suggest that the increase in ocean temperatures in the 19th century was due to CO2 production, would they? Which is the point.

Supporters of AGW continue to assert, like GoBoatingNow, that somehow the question is so settled that they can make declarative statements that man made global warming is a fact. This is nonsense. In fact, a majority (64%) of geo-scientists now are skeptical of AGW, and for good reason - the data is too weak to draw scientific conclusions, much less conclusions that dictate we should damage our economy pursuing some leftists view of good climate policy.

Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis - Forbes

These geo-scientists sensibly note the overwhelming impact of natural causes of warming, and so reject the politically motivated calls for DOING SOMETHING, even if that something is completely pointless.

And yes, it is a political issue because yes, most AGW enthusiasts also just happen to be big government enthusiasts, a.k.a. liberals.

Speaking of which, if a denier is someone who denies that something is or has happened that clearly did or is happening, and it's ok for some on this thread to refer to AGW skeptics as 'deniers', (like the majority of geo-scientists I suppose), would it be ok to call supporters of AGW climate fools, since a fool is someone who believes in something that isn't happening? Seems fair, doesn't it?

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by foolishsailor

What an absurd and ill-informed statement.

The countries with the; highest standard of living in the world, longest lifespan, highest quality of life, lowest unemployment, highest level of education, smallest gap between rich and poor, largest middle class, etc are all "socialist".

They are Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark...the "social democratic" states.

They top the list for almot every criteria listed by WHO and other international bodies in comparison to the rest of the world.

As for the precious US, which I am a citizen, with the exception of military strength they rarely make the top ten.

"Ill informed" seems to be a catch all for "doesn't fit my prejudices".

Firstly, Sweden isn't socialist. Cuba is. Guess where people from Cuba would rather live...
Secondly, the Swedes themselves are starting to realize their welfare state might not be sustainable. Any system the redistributes income creates incentives for people that are more productive to leave. In the end you are left with nobody to hold the safety net up. Sweden is also increasingly having problems with the permanent underclass it created. Witness the recent riots in Stockholm...

Comparing Sweden, or Denmark with the US is also a bit of a dishonest comparison. Sweden is a small country. It's easy to be special when you are small. I would like to see a breakdown of HDI for each US state. I wouldn't be surprised if several US states scored in the same league as Scandinavia.
And don't discount culture. Sweden is populated by Swedes. There aren't many poor Swedes in the US either...

Last I checked we had the highest level of poverty in the west, largest gap between rich and poor, largest percentage of people not able to meet minimun food requirements, etc...

When and where did you check that? It appears your sources are ill informed...