Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

So, aside from weather related bitching and moaning and a whole lot of the usual "could" and "maybe" claims, the basic answer is zip.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Still curious about those consistently lower sat temp readings, and the upward-only adjustments to the ground readings. Probably just a bunch of opposing scientific opinions again, but I fear Jack may have his usual Friday afternoon quiz scheduled for me tomorrow. As I recall, it was a good way to insure that guys like me didn't skip out of school early for the weekend. Gotta quit goofing off in the nav/seamanship threads and study up.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Unrealistically low price grows demand.

Tell that to the traders on the Chicago exchange who are wrestling with increasingly lower demand and chronic oversupply with oil at approx. $30! At what level of govt. taxation would it start deterring demand? And if the subsequent payment of the "green check" won't encourage guys like you to switch to more renewables, then it all sounds like another gimmick that might make YOU feel good, but will hurt poorer people who's fossil fuel consumption may not be discretionary in order to work & survive.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Unrealistically low price grows demand.

Low price indicates steady demand vs over production with a commodity a.k.a "dumping



Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

You tell us...

What would it take to get YOU and JACK to buy into some sort of carbon reducing energy source? So far, it appears that YOU and JACK don't intend to spend any of your own money, but would rather others spend theirs... while YOU and JACK continue a carbon energy based lifestyle.

You don't know my lifestyle. Or what I've spent, or do.

Doesn't have any bearing on your OP/threadstarter either. Just sayin'

"Talk is cheap."

...it's a free public forum. You're getting your money's worth.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Exile

Tell that to the traders on the Chicago exchange who are wrestling with increasingly lower demand and chronic oversupply with oil at approx. $30! At what level of govt. taxation would it start deterring demand? And if the subsequent payment of the "green check" won't encourage guys like you to switch to more renewables, then it all sounds like another gimmick that might make YOU feel good, but will hurt poorer people who's fossil fuel consumption may not be discretionary in order to work & survive.

I'm referring to price over the last few decades, not just this past year.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

You don't know my lifestyle. Or what I've spent, or do.

Doesn't have any bearing on your OP/threadstarter either. Just sayin'

.

And your avoidance of the question leads others to believe you have done nothing personally. Now I have admitted I have solar on my home to run all of my power needs and heat with biodiesel , my cooking is done with propane. No I did not do any of that to help the environment I did it purely to help my pocketbook. ( bio diesel is a bit more expensive but I feel I get more heat per gallon from it and it does support a bussiness that is homed in my state.)

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Exile

Tell that to the traders on the Chicago exchange who are wrestling with increasingly lower demand and chronic oversupply with oil at approx. $30! At what level of govt. taxation would it start deterring demand? And if the subsequent payment of the "green check" won't encourage guys like you to switch to more renewables, then it all sounds like another gimmick that might make YOU feel good, but will hurt poorer people who's fossil fuel consumption may not be discretionary in order to work & survive.

Example:

I live just a few miles from work and drive a car which gets nearly 40mpg. Some of the nursing assistants at the nuthouse who earn less than half what I make live more than an hour away. They will be the ones mostly hurt by higher energy taxes... I won't feel the difference.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

And your avoidance of the question leads others to believe you have done nothing personally. Now I have admitted I have solar on my home to run all of my power needs and heat with biodiesel , my cooking is done with propane. No I did not do any of that to help the environment I did it purely to help my pocketbook. ( bio diesel is a bit more expensive but I feel I get more heat per gallon from it and it does support a bussiness that is homed in my state.)

Good for you... but how does it bear on the OP?

[Mike OReilly]

Popping in again. Can't read all five new pages of posts since my last visit, but as before, it's clear nothing has changed. A few quickies:

#1. Nuclear power is far and away the best realistic option if we want to avert this slow moving climate disaster. No matter how you slice it, fission reactors are magnitudes safer than anything out there. It is lunacy for the so-called Green movement to fight against them. Yes, they are horribly expensive, but that simply captures the real cost of powering our civilization. You free-marketers should love this b/c it will provide the proper market incentives that are currently masked by using our atmosphere as a free dumping ground.

#2. While I do believe we all need to take personal action to limit our environmental footprint, the fact is, all the personal solar panels in the world won't amount to a hill of beans when it comes to making a meaningful difference. We need systemic change that can only be driven by strong governments that serve ALL the people, which is a far cry from the current political arrangement.

#3. Until we address the core issues, which is that our current economic system is essentially at war with our global ecosystem, nothing will happen.

#4. I am convinced nothing will happen until it's too late to avert serious damage to our civilization. Those with power benefit from the status quo, and have bought our global political system so as to server their needs. They are willing to watch Rome burn, just so long as the quarterly dividends keep rolling in.

So enjoy the discussion. It's lots of fun.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Good for you... but how does it bear on the OP?

It has no bearing on the op however you are still evading the question what have you personally done to reduce your carbon footprint fro whatever reason? Several on here have disclosed at the behest of people on this thread . When asked you evade the question. Do you not believe in full disclosure ? Enquiring minds want to know

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

When asked you evade the question. Do you not believe in full disclosure ? Enquiring minds want to know

... because it has no bearing on the OP. Or to my argument. Want my hair colour too?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

... because it has no bearing on the OP. Or to my argument. Want my hair colour too?

No I don't want your hair color.
True it has no bearing on the op . As far as your argument it would lead credence to your position. Most of the posts have no bearing on the op.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

No I don't want your hair color.
True it has no bearing on the op . As far as your argument it would lead credence to your position.

I disagree. Nice try once again, tho.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Exile

Still curious about those consistently lower sat temp readings, and the upward-only adjustments to the ground readings. Probably just a bunch of opposing scientific opinions again, but I fear Jack may have his usual Friday afternoon quiz scheduled for me tomorrow. As I recall, it was a good way to insure that guys like me didn't skip out of school early for the weekend. Gotta quit goofing off in the nav/seamanship threads and study up.

The resounding silence when I asked whether it was the surface temperatures or the models he has issues with is telling

Post #1690

[StuM]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

Can you explain what you mean by 'Co2 has almost reached its thermal absorption maximum anyway.' I can find no reference to this anywhere.

Where have you looked? On SkepticalScience?

It's basic "Climate Science 101".
Anyone who has studied the subject should be aware of the logarithmic effect of CO2 absorption.

You might try reading this post with an open mind:
The Logarithmic Effect of Carbon Dioxide | Watts Up With That?