• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Global Heat: Britain longest heatwave in 42 years, deadly heat in Japan and Arctic

Exactly, which was the whole point of the Paris Accord, which Trump backed out of like the dumbass, reckless fool that he is.

I’m not sure how Trump withdrawing the UNITED STATES from the Paris accord would keep China and India from abiding by it. The Paris Accord was worthless, really, considering the United States was exceeding the standards set forth and paying more money than most of the other nations involved. Maybe if China and India paid for their pollution rather than everyone else paying for it while they trudge forth with less expensive fuel resources it wouldn’t be such a bad deal.

You may hate President Trump, but one thing everyone should be able to agree on is that it is time for the American taxpayer to stop being the planet’s piggy bank so the rest of the world can prop up their socialized welfare states.
 
On top of that, Trump said he was willing to renegotiate the deal where the United States isn’t the primary benefactor. Not surprisingly, none of the other participants liked that deal.
 
On top of that, Trump said he was willing to renegotiate the deal where the United States isn’t the primary benefactor. Not surprisingly, none of the other participants liked that deal.

Go figure. It's for the good of mankind right? Give me a break. As transparent as window glass.
 
I’m not sure how Trump withdrawing the UNITED STATES from the Paris accord would keep China and India from abiding by it. The Paris Accord was worthless, really, considering the United States was exceeding the standards set forth and paying more money than most of the other nations involved. Maybe if China and India paid for their pollution rather than everyone else paying for it while they trudge forth with less expensive fuel resources it wouldn’t be such a bad deal.

You may hate President Trump, but one thing everyone should be able to agree on is that it is time for the American taxpayer to stop being the planet’s piggy bank so the rest of the world can prop up their socialized welfare states.

Clearly, your white privilege is keeping you from seeing that the US is, primarily, at fault that those countries arenin such a state that they cannot do without the fossil fuels and polluting. Duh

With as much money as has been sent there, you'd think Africa would be covered with solar panels and showing the rest of us how it is done. Think about how much better their quality of life would be if they had all this "free" carbon neutral electricity!
 
The Paris Climate Hoax doesn’t work without US money, lots of it

G20 nations doing LESS than nothing on climate (emissions increasing in 15 of the 20 nations)

Screen-Shot-2018-11-23-at-4.25.09-PM.png


https://www.climate-transparency.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Brown-to-Green-Report-2018_rev.pdf


btw, CO2 isn't a pollutant, it's plant food

A warm earth is a happy earth, ice = death!

ice_sheets.png
 
when it comes to climate change/global warming, I tend to go with the things I actually see first hand.

A few years ago my uncle decided to have the roads in the ranch complex paved, he was tired of the gravel maintenance and mud. He used asphalt, turns out we now have less snow/ice issues than in the past. The roads melt and dry from the solar energy much faster than the gravel and concrete areas. The surrounding micro climates are a bit warmer overall too. With this local info, let's look at the changes on a much larger scale. Imagine how much the micro climates have been altered by the large cities and all the paved over ground and large scale thermal mass buildings. I am sure that there is a direct correlation there, due to my observation on a smaller scale.


On to observation #2. we have tank heaters on the field stock tanks to keep them free from ice during the winter. Every one of them are and have been on individual meters for years. 5 years ago we started placing concrete pads around them, 20 ft out from the tanks. The reason we did this was to mitigate the mud issues, BUT, we have seen a reduction on energy usage by almost 7% since then. Last year we incorporated a material into the concrete we used that resulted in a black concrete mixture. We are HOPING to see an additional energy savings from that too. These results lend more support to point #1


I am not a scientist, but I do believe my FIRSTHAND observations. I DO BELIEVE that human terraforming has impacted our climate here on the big blue marble, but I am not completely sold on the fact that we are 100% responsible. I also believe that we as a country have made incredible strides towards reducing our impact, and could make even more with the desire to do so. I also believe that these steps will not really do anything except slow the destruction by a small amount, due to other countries increasing their destructive terraforming as their societies advance. I also do not believe that it is our RESPONSIBILITY to fund their advancement.
 
when it comes to climate change/global warming, I tend to go with the things I actually see first hand.

A few years ago my uncle decided to have the roads in the ranch complex paved, he was tired of the gravel maintenance and mud. He used asphalt, turns out we now have less snow/ice issues than in the past. The roads melt and dry from the solar energy much faster than the gravel and concrete areas. The surrounding micro climates are a bit warmer overall too. With this local info, let's look at the changes on a much larger scale. Imagine how much the micro climates have been altered by the large cities and all the paved over ground and large scale thermal mass buildings. I am sure that there is a direct correlation there, due to my observation on a smaller scale.


On to observation #2. we have tank heaters on the field stock tanks to keep them free from ice during the winter. Every one of them are and have been on individual meters for years. 5 years ago we started placing concrete pads around them, 20 ft out from the tanks. The reason we did this was to mitigate the mud issues, BUT, we have seen a reduction on energy usage by almost 7% since then. Last year we incorporated a material into the concrete we used that resulted in a black concrete mixture. We are HOPING to see an additional energy savings from that too. These results lend more support to point #1


I am not a scientist, but I do believe my FIRSTHAND observations. I DO BELIEVE that human terraforming has impacted our climate here on the big blue marble, but I am not completely sold on the fact that we are 100% responsible. I also believe that we as a country have made incredible strides towards reducing our impact, and could make even more with the desire to do so. I also believe that these steps will not really do anything except slow the destruction by a small amount, due to other countries increasing their destructive terraforming as their societies advance. I also do not believe that it is our RESPONSIBILITY to fund their advancement.

We, obviously, affect the environment. IMLTHO, all of the actual pollution we are throwing in the landfills, oceans and all over the place, is far more dangerous than CO2.
 
How does your first hand seeing of things show you that the changes you see are man made?
 
Global Cooling Alert!


Lack of sunspots to bring record cold, warns NASA scientist



“It could happen in a matter of months,” says Martin Mlynczak of NASA’s Langley Research Center.
________________

“The sun is entering one of the deepest Solar Minima of the Space Age,” wrote Dr Tony Phillips.

Sunspots have been absent for most of 2018 and Earth’s upper atmosphere is responding, says Phillips, editor of spaceweather.com.

Data from NASA’s TIMED satellite show that the thermosphere (the uppermost layer of air around our planet) is cooling and shrinking, literally decreasing the radius of the atmosphere.

https://spaceweatherarchive.com/2018/09/27/the-chill-of-solar-minimum/
 
How does your first hand seeing of things show you that the changes you see are man made?

Because, when they build the structures, it seems to directly affect their microclimate. Could, still, be a coincidence, i suppose.

In general, i do agree that all the paving, concrete, large buildings and dense populations could have an affect on the immediate are, temp wise. It is part of the argument regarding the locations of the measuring stations for Global warm....errr....Climate Change.
 
speaking of Paris



France fuel protests: Police in Paris fire tear gas


Police in Paris have used tear gas and water cannon to disperse protesters demonstrating for a second weekend against rising fuel prices.

p06srjww.jpg


Some demonstrators ripped up paving stones and threw firecrackers at police while shouting slogans calling for President Emmanuel Macron to resign.

The price of diesel, the most commonly used fuel in French cars, has risen by around 23% over the past 12 months

_104470764_mediaitem104470762.jpg



The Macron government raised its hydrocarbon tax this year by 7.6 cents per litre on diesel and 3.9 cents on petrol, as part of a campaign for cleaner cars and fuel.

The decision to impose a further increase of 6.5 cents on diesel and 2.9 cents on petrol on 1 January 2019 was seen as the final straw.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46328439
 
How does your first hand seeing of things show you that the changes you see are man made?

I have yet to see naturally paved parking lots and huge buildings. Those to this unlearnt person appear to be man made.
 
when it comes to climate change/global warming, I tend to go with the things I actually see first hand.

A few years ago my uncle decided to have the roads in the ranch complex paved, he was tired of the gravel maintenance and mud. He used asphalt, turns out we now have less snow/ice issues than in the past. The roads melt and dry from the solar energy much faster than the gravel and concrete areas. The surrounding micro climates are a bit warmer overall too. With this local info, let's look at the changes on a much larger scale. Imagine how much the micro climates have been altered by the large cities and all the paved over ground and large scale thermal mass buildings. I am sure that there is a direct correlation there, due to my observation on a smaller scale.


On to observation #2. we have tank heaters on the field stock tanks to keep them free from ice during the winter. Every one of them are and have been on individual meters for years. 5 years ago we started placing concrete pads around them, 20 ft out from the tanks. The reason we did this was to mitigate the mud issues, BUT, we have seen a reduction on energy usage by almost 7% since then. Last year we incorporated a material into the concrete we used that resulted in a black concrete mixture. We are HOPING to see an additional energy savings from that too. These results lend more support to point #1


I am not a scientist, but I do believe my FIRSTHAND observations. I DO BELIEVE that human terraforming has impacted our climate here on the big blue marble, but I am not completely sold on the fact that we are 100% responsible. I also believe that we as a country have made incredible strides towards reducing our impact, and could make even more with the desire to do so. I also believe that these steps will not really do anything except slow the destruction by a small amount, due to other countries increasing their destructive terraforming as their societies advance. I also do not believe that it is our RESPONSIBILITY to fund their advancement.

Paving greenery is absolutely a problem. Moreso than burning coal or wood or gas. Again manmade CO2 production is grossly overstated, and its effects are being intentionally inflated to scare people. There is a monetary agenda behind that and its obvious. However there are more worrying things we do that affect direct heating. However that doesn’t have the same political or monetary benefits to freaking out about so its ignored.

Its like why high sulfur coal with higher CO2 output is basically regulated out of the US, but we still mine it and sell it overseas... because obviously the Chinese atmosphere is totally separate from ours...

And direct heating issues aren’t compounding... its harder to make up a scenario where life on earth ends in our lifetime because of it... using very biased global warming models you can scaresshame people into buying into it...
 
Last edited:
Paving greenery is absolutely a problem. Moreso than burning coal or wood or gas. Again manmade CO2 production is grossly overstated, and its effects are being intentionally inflated to scare people. There is a monetary agenda behind that and its obvious. However there are more worrying things we do that affect direct heating. However that doesn’t have the same political or monetary benefits to freaking out about so its ignored.

Its like why high sulfur coal with higher CO2 output is basically regulated out of the US, but we still mine it and sell it overseas... because obviously the Chinese atmosphere is totally separate from ours...

And direct heating issues aren’t compounding... its harder to make up a scenario where life on earth ends in our lifetime because of it... using very biased global warming models you can scaresshame people into buying into it...

The world isn't getting warmer, it's getting colder. Anyhow, this wouldn't work in the north because it would freeze and fall apart, but it's a pretty neat idea.

 
Good question: why publish a dire federal climate report on Black Friday?

A Grave Climate Warning, Buried on Black Friday
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/national-climate-assessment-black-friday/576589/

On Friday, the busiest shopping day of the year, the federal government published a massive and dire new report on climate change. The report warns, repeatedly and directly, that climate change could soon imperil the American way of life, transforming every region of the country, imposing frustrating costs on the economy, and harming the health of virtually every citizen.
<section class="l-article__section s-cms-content" itemprop="articleBody" id="article-section-0">
Most significantly, the National Climate Assessment—which is endorsed by NASA, NOAA, the Department of Defense, and 10 other federal scientific agencies—contradicts nearly every position taken on the issue by President Donald Trump. Where the president has insisted that fighting global warming will harm the economy, the report responds: Climate change, if left unchecked, could eventually cost the economy hundreds of billions of dollars per year, and kill thousands of Americans to boot. Where the president has said that the climate will “probably” “change back,” the report replies: Many consequences of climate change will last for millennia, and some (such as the extinction of plant and animal species) will be permanent.

The report is a huge achievement for American science. It represents cumulative decades of work from more than 300 authors. Since 2015, scientists from across the U.S. government, state universities, and businesses have read thousands of studies, summarizing and collating them into this document. By law, a National Climate Assessment like this must be published every four years.
</section>
It may seem like a funny report to dump on the public on Black Friday, when most Americans care more about recovering from Thanksgiving dinner than they do about adapting to the grave conclusions of climate science. Indeed, who ordered the report to come out today? It’s a good question with no obvious answer.

Andrew Light, another author of the report and a senior fellow at the World Resources Institute, said that although the report cannot make policy recommendations, it might be read as an endorsement of the Paris Agreement on climate change.

“If the United States were to try and achieve the targets in the Paris Agreement, then things will be bad, but we can manage,” he said. “But if we don’t meet them, then we’re talking about hundreds of thousands of lives every year that are at risk because of climate change. And hundreds of billions of dollars.”
 
bawk!


nobody cares
 
Last edited:
They payt $7/gallon on gas in France and Macron's idea is to INCREASE that price so his renewable energy plans become a more cost effective alternative.

Think about THAT a second. Obama was clear that he felt $4-$5/gallon gas here in the U.S. would be the "required" price of gas to make alternatve energy cost effective. Obama WANTED that as the "solution" to global warming.

The logic to DOUBLE energy costs for everyone (people, businesses, farms, etc.) is one of the most ludicous ideas I've ever heard of. The cost of energy impacts EVERYTHING. Obama and his left wing socialist friends WANT mass inflation from rising energy prices. It will lead to more price-fixing from governments. It will lead to more subsidies. It will restrict movement and the transfer of goods. Which is exactly the way socialists want this world to go. More control.

This has nothing at all to do with the environment. Europe has no fossil fuels to compete with the U.S. China doesn't either. India is limited. These are the three greatest competitors to the U.S. economy in the next 50 years. In order to "level the playing field" with the U.S. economically, they have been hell bent on making fossil fuels out to be the boogie man of all ills. By guilting the U.S. into this same religion (and it is a religion), they EXPECT us to intentionally harm our economy to let them be equals.

And the funny thing is while China and India propaganda that they CARE about these things (and are so willing to sign climate agreements) but don't do anything. They are poluting like crazy. Something like 9 of the top 10 most poluted cities are in India. 90% of the plastic in the ocean comes from Southeast/South Asia. Half the world's population is in a 2000 mile radius around Hong Kong.

Global warming has NOTHING to do with the U.S. We are fine. We are exceptional. We are lowering our per capita carbon footprint every year through simple capitalism. The fossil fuels we are burning are cleaner and more efficient. Energy costs (when taking into account inflation) are lower than they were in 1950's. All this COULD lead to huge inovation and economic expansion if we let it. We can "out energy" all of our major economic adversaries and reduce costs (which means we can spend more on workers and pump more money back into the economy and more money back into re-investment).

I wish people would just see the Trump message through all his bull ****. All these things he talks about with the economy - energy independence, better trade deals to keep jobs here, fair trade, tax reform on corporations, eliminate currency manipulation - will all benefit the U.S. enormously over the next 25 years if we let it happen. Not only because it's good for us, but because the E.U. and China won't be able to keep up with us while this happens - they have looming problems. The E.U. has potential race wars, rising energy costs and the weight of socialism debt. China has the inevitable middle-class revolution (demands for more free time, more social services, cleaner environment). While they struggle, we can prosper.
 
I wish people would just see the Trump message through all his bull ****. All these things he talks about with the economy - energy independence, better trade deals to keep jobs here, fair trade, tax reform on corporations, eliminate currency manipulation - will all benefit the U.S. enormously over the next 25 years if we let it happen. Not only because it's good for us, but because the E.U. and China won't be able to keep up with us while this happens - they have looming problems. The E.U. has potential race wars, rising energy costs and the weight of socialism debt. China has the inevitable middle-class revolution (demands for more free time, more social services, cleaner environment). While they struggle, we can prosper.

You hit the nail on the head. The issue is that Dem-socialist (Just a new name for real socialists) don't want the U.S. to do better than China. They want everyone equal. They hate the idea of the U.S. being the lone super power. They hate capitalism and free markets. Like you said, energy is another way to control people which is the ultimate goal of the dem-socialists.
 
They payt $7/gallon on gas in France and Macron's idea is to INCREASE that price so his renewable energy plans become a more cost effective alternative.

Exactly. To make "renewables" cost effective, the Libs have to artificially increase (tax) the cost of fossil fuels and artificially reduce (subsidize) the cost of renewables.

 
Top