Global Warming Opens Up Antarctic Waterways

[Brob2]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

- because we're in a period of increased political polarization, and the above groups, the status quo, are most closely aligned with the right wing, and ecological concern is most closely aligned with the left, and people seem quite content to follow politics over science.

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

The world is somewhat bigger than the US.

Indeed it is, as is the increased polarization of politics. Why do you construe his comments as US centric? If you have any knowledge of world events you would be aware that from eastern and western Europe to Canada and even South America new, far right parties are being formed or old ones are becoming stronger and more popular, as are leftist parties.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Brob2

Indeed it is, as is the increased polarization of politics. Why do you construe his comments as US centric? If you have any knowledge of world events you would be aware that from eastern and western Europe to Canada and even South America new, far right parties are being formed or old ones are becoming stronger and more popular, as are leftist parties.

I have no interest in being drawn into a political debate. Sorry.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

I have no interest in being drawn into a political debate. Sorry.

And you were high-fiving the senor from the right-wing peanut gallery for what reason, then?

Your position is nothing but political. About zero of the little fragments of 'evidence' that you fling about has any real traction, they've all been successfully deflated, yet you and your ideological buddies apparently think that if you throw them fast and often enough they'll maybe pile up and stick together (because of spit, maybe) into some kind of credible case.

And you know what? It worked. You successfully trolled me and a few others. So, props for that.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

And you were high-fiving the senor from the right-wing peanut gallery for what reason, then?

Your position is nothing but political. About zero of the little fragments of 'evidence' that you fling about has any real traction, they've all been successfully deflated, yet you and your ideological buddies apparently think that if you throw them fast and often enough they'll maybe pile up and stick together (because of spit, maybe) into some kind of credible case.

And you know what? It worked. You successfully trolled me and a few others. So, props for that.

Then how come some pro-AGW government isn't in power with 97% of the vote? Little to do with politics at this level imo. Why you think you're being trolled, I have no idea?

Actually, just looked back I haven't raised politics at all unless it was a response afaik.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[savoir]

[QUOTE=Lake-Effect;1799440]- because some major industrial sectors stand to have their profits curtailed by any reduction in fossil fuel consumption, and have spent massive amounts to fund "counter-science" and advocacy, leaving no trick unplayed, to block the science from gaining traction with the public and governments.

- because we're in a period of increased political polarization, and the above groups, the status quo, are most closely aligned with the right wing, and ecological concern is most closely aligned with the left, and people seem quite content to follow politics over science.

The collateral damage in all of this is, of course, the people who dedicate their lives and careers to the pursuit of knowledge (for not very f#@king much money either), and the scientific process itself.

Not that you seem to give a damn...[/QUOTE]

Aaahhh, the old closing sentence insult trick. Typical warmista.

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

"Not that you seem to give a damn... "


Ah yes. Typical leftie.
When you can't prove your argument, throw in a personal attack.

Typical indeed...



The caption reads 'Sydney, what's happened to you? You've become obese.'

[Lake-Effect]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgojY1Q

[SailOar]

California’s Cycles of Drought | New York Times

The drought, now in its fourth year, is by many measures the worst since the state began keeping records of temperature and precipitation in the 1800s. And with a population now close to 39 million and a thirsty, $50 billion agricultural industry, California has been affected more by this drought than by any previous one.

But scientists say that in the more ancient past, California and the Southwest occasionally had even worse droughts — so-called megadroughts — that lasted decades. At least in parts of California, in two cases in the last 1,200 years, these dry spells lingered for up to two centuries.

The new normal, scientists say, may in fact be an old one....





A recent study, for example, suggests that in the second half of this century, the warming that will result from rising concentrations of greenhouse gases will greatly increase the risk of a severe long-term drought in the Southwest and Plains that could rival or even exceed some of the ancient ones.

“Climate change is really weighting the dice” in favor of future megadroughts, said Toby R. Ault, a researcher at Cornell University and an author of the study...

“Equally as important but much easier to forget is that we consider the last 150 years or so to be normal,” he added. “But you don’t have to go back very far at all to find much drier decades, and much drier centuries.”
That raises the possibility that California has built its water infrastructure — indeed, its entire modern society — during a wet period....

“But I was actually surprised at how well we’d get through such a drought,” he said. “California would not dry up and blow away. It would be bad but we would still have civilization, so long as we managed it at all well.”

[Rustic Charm]

Holy Toledo

This thread is still going. Are you guys going for a record?

[senormechanico]

At least it's starting to suffer from over exposure.
The number of posts per day is dropping.
Some people seem to LIVE to post here.
Do they even own a boat?

[LakeSuperior]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

At least it's starting to suffer from over exposure.
The number of posts per day is dropping.
Some people seem to LIVE to post here.
Do they even own a boat?

Please provide references from refereed journal articles for your remarks. My sense is the number of posts per day is going up [1].


References
1. Python, M., Posts Per Day Increasing on CF Global Warming Thread, J. of Argumentative Research, Vol. 3, No. 4, Apr, 2015.

[conachair]

Originally Posted by LakeSuperior

Please provide references from refereed journal articles for your remarks. My sense is the number of posts per day is going up [1].


References
1. Python, M., Posts Per Day Increasing on CF Global Warming Thread, J. of Argumentative Research, Vol. 3, No. 4, Apr, 2015.

Your reference is wrong. It was in the journal of confrontational academia

[savoir]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by savoir

Perfect comparison of this thread. Thanks for a good laugh.

[Lake-Effect]