skiing in june

[.270]

interesting article. aspen is gonna re-open next weekend. i'm sure that somehow or other that "scientists" can figure out a way to say it's global warming doing it. Lark.

 

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?sto...0&catid=188

 

 

[Rembrant]

Lark,

Saying that snow in June means we're not having global warming, is like saying that 20 years of drought is proof that we are.

Too simplistic.

You know that we are having global warming because the polar ice packs ain't what they used to be. The question is whether man has anything to do with it, or not.

I agree completely with you about the political legislation of the weather - for monetary gain.

Mike

[.270]

scientist say that 13,000 years ago the north polar cap was 16,000 feet thick, in the northern half of what is now the lower 48. something warmed up for sure. and it was a long time before al gore thought of it. it's apparant the earth is a little warmer than it has been at times in the past. what i don't buy is that it is human caused or anything that any kind of legislation will change. it's just the dam weather. i just love tweekin' the noses of folks that insist we're all gonna turn to jerky unless we put a big tax on ourselves, with stuff like this. record snowfall, record cold weather, but we're all gonna dry up and blow away. unless we spend a buncha money that goes straight into guys pockets, like al gore. just trying to get these kids that are used to havin' some birkenstock wearin' teacher do their thinkin' for em, to read a little and have an informed opinion and see what the truth really is. Lark.

[wetmule]

I think they'll be skiing in Montana too, I just heard parts of Montana could get up to 10" today with temps in the 20's. But as we all know even if it's really cooling, it's all due to global warming.

[TAM]

I saw a post on one of these hunting sites a few months ago that said:

 

"Al Gore didn't invent the internet, but he made up global warming."

 

[azyoung]

Lark,

 

Another link with some excellent points!

 

http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/19842304.html

 

azyoung

 

 

[Rembrant]

Uh, I'm no scientist, and I haven't done a whole lot of reading or studying on the subject of global warming, but this last attached article seems flawed in a couple of very basic ways:

#1. This guy says we don't have smog in big cities like we used to because of the improvements in emissions control. No doubt emissions control has help, but we have about a zillion more vehichles on the road now, and last time I looked at a big city in person or on TV, guess what? There is really bad smog in every large city in the world.

#2. His arguement about carbon dioxide sounded pretty good until I remembered that I learnred in grade school that the burning of fossil fuels creates carbon monoxide, not carbon dioxide.

Mike

[azyoung]

Burning fossil fuels will produce both:

 

From Wikipedia -

 

Carbon dioxide is generated as a byproduct of the combustion of fossil fuels or vegetable matter, among other chemical processes.

 

Carbon monoxide is produced from the partial combustion of carbon-containing compounds, notably in internal-combustion engines.

 

 

azyoung

[bobbyo]

Uh, I'm no scientist, and I haven't done a whole lot of reading or studying on the subject of global warming, but this last attached article seems flawed in a couple of very basic ways:

#1. This guy says we don't have smog in big cities like we used to because of the improvements in emissions control. No doubt emissions control has help, but we have about a zillion more vehichles on the road now, and last time I looked at a big city in person or on TV, guess what? There is really bad smog in every large city in the world.

#2. His arguement about carbon dioxide sounded pretty good until I remembered that I learnred in grade school that the burning of fossil fuels creates carbon monoxide, not carbon dioxide.

Mike

 

Mike,

Way to be skeptical of what you read on the internet. You dont' need to be well read or highly scientific to figure out that putting a lot of smoke and invisible gases in the air. is probablly not a good idea.

 

Maybe pollution causes global warming, maybe it causes global cooling, maybe it causes no climate change whatsoever. The bottom line is it does not take a genius to figure out that a bunch of smoke in our atmosphere is probably not a good idea. The thing that I feel people don't understand is the magnitude that the smoke/pollution/greenhouse gases is going to increase. I think people in Arizona don't understand how densely populated the world is. In India 336 people per Square km, Japan 339 per km. China 142 per Km, Indonesia 117 per km, United states 31 per square km. Arizona 17.43 per square KM Until recently these people in the emerging world have lived without cars, electricity, heating. Now they want it and are more economically able to buy it. What is our air going to look like when suddenly 2 billion Chinese drive VW bugs? 1 billion Indians in glorified Yugos. I know many laugh at me and think I am drinking the koolaid, la la Bob thinks the sky is falling what a whimpy chicken little or even Al Gore's little bitch . We have noting to worry about in Arizona our air is clear, but there is only one atmosphere and we can't build a fence to hold out the interloppers.

 

I trully worry because I have personally experienced the effects of poor air quality. I grew up in LA in late 60s and early 70s. I spent most of that time (0-9) wheezing and hacking like someone with a 2pack a day habit. I would have episodes were getting a breath became such a struggle that the alternative seemed more appealing. Doctors doped me up three times a day on, what I know now to be, a powerful amphetamine. "Just has severe asthma" is what the doctors would say to my worried sick parents." Maybe allergies, maybe moisture," never mentioning the brown soot in the sky. Finally my dad figured it out and moved us out of that cesspool. Strangely, I suddenly grew out of my asthma when I didn't have smog in every breath. So please excuse me when I get worried that I could be reliving those 70s glory days all over the planet or even worse seeing my kids or grandkids go through that experience. I certainly have a glimpse of the past every time I drive into the Valley or Tucson. Why is it so hard to see those mountains through that brown Sh--.

[Diamondbackaz]

Uh, I'm no scientist, and I haven't done a whole lot of reading or studying on the subject of global warming, but this last attached article seems flawed in a couple of very basic ways:

#1. This guy says we don't have smog in big cities like we used to because of the improvements in emissions control. No doubt emissions control has help, but we have about a zillion more vehichles on the road now, and last time I looked at a big city in person or on TV, guess what? There is really bad smog in every large city in the world.

#2. His arguement about carbon dioxide sounded pretty good until I remembered that I learnred in grade school that the burning of fossil fuels creates carbon monoxide, not carbon dioxide.

Mike

 

First off, if we were driving cars with 1960's technology, you wouldn't be able to breathe the air in Phoenix. What we want a car to do is get what we call complete combustion which is HC + O goes in and is burned. During that burning process we get H2O and CO2 out the tail pipe. CO (carbon monoxide is created where we didn't get a second oxygen to attach to the carbon) is a byproduct of incomplete combustion. Things like the catalytic converter helps to complete the oxidation process.

 

To learn more http://www.marymount.k12.ny.us/marynet/06s...ktreaction.html

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combustion

 

 

[Rembrant]

That would explain why people die from carbon monoxide poisoning in or behind a boat. Boats don't have emmission control?

Always wondered why people can die sitting in the back of a boat, but not at a traffic light in Phoenix.

But the science you just threw at us (that I can barely get the gist of) says that complete burning rarely takes place, so we are still getting carbon monoxide in the air. And I sure as heck know that we still have smog, so now I'm wondering what the make-up of our smog really is. I'm sure this stuff is probably common knowledge.

Something else to look up.

Mike

[.270]

carbon dioxide is also caused by breathing, fartin', rotting logs or any other form of plant matter. it's dumped out by the tons by volcanos. just about any natural process puts off co2. and again, if global warming is just now happening, what happened to the 16,000 feet of ice that used to cover everything north of san francisco? where the heck did it go? or do we not count anything before say, 1980? since the last ice age ended, the world has been warming up. and it will continue until the next one. it's called "weather". al gore and all his koolaid kids together can't change it. and man didn't cause it. it's just a way to create a new tax. when in heck are the dumb folks gonna wise up? heck, anyone with any sense at all knows that smog is bad, recycling is a good thing, getting the best gas mileage you can is good, throwing trash everywhere is bad, etc., etc., etc.. but you can't print enough money to change the weather. you can't make enough laws. or enough hybrid cars. some folks have come up with a scare tactic and buncha other folks who have been letting politicians do their thinkin' for em have bought into it. you have a brain, use the dang thing. the U.S. gets cleaner every day. we've figured out ways to extract the bad stuff from the processes that have become neccessary to provide our life style. russia, india, china, all the african countries, mexico, all of asia, etc, couldn't care less about pollution. but you never hear anyone trying to get them to change. whoever said that these 3rd world countries have been living without cars or electricity until recently is a fool. there are cars and powerplants every where. where in the heck did you hear that? you think they don't have cars or electricity in india? good night. al gore tell ya that? india and pakistan are cesspools. so is hong kong and mexico city. some of the biggest and most beautifull lakes on earth have been contaminated by nuclear dumping in russia to the point that they won't support life. not even microscopic one celled fungus. mexico city is so dirty that nearly every baby born has some form of birth defect. you think this just happened? these places have coal burner power plants with no emission controls. they have smelters and steel mills and refineries with no controls on any emissions. smoke or solid and liquid waste. just dump it where it's convenient. tiajuana has chrome plating facilities that dump their waste in the street and let it flow to wherever. we get a little haze, but it's mostly dust from construction, farming and vehicle moving around and kicking it up. wise up guys. it's just another tactic to get what you have and give it to folks that don't deserve it. and again, what happened to the 16,000 feet of ice? i don't remember my grandad talkin' about it? Lark.

[Rembrant]

Lark,

What you wrote is the truth, and makes me glad that I don't love this world, but rather, the ONE who makes worlds.

Mike