disputed FACTS - Page 10 - Router Forums
 370Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #91 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-04-2019, 01:13 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Country: Canada
First Name: Brent
Posts: 149
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cherryville Chuck View Post
The only way I know of to reduce runoff is to go back to tilling the soil again so that the fertilizer is in the ground instead of on the ground but it will still leach. That also has negative consequences. I work spring and fall in the industry and the farmers I deal with are using the best farming practices they can. It is economically to their benefit to do so but every system has pros and cons. For example much has been said about genetically modified crops in the last few years and many people believe that they may be responsible for long term health consequences but as one 3rd generation farmer from Grande Prairie who is quite knowledgeable told me if we did that it would condemn 100,000 people per day to starve to death. It`s an issue that is a lot more complicated than it seems.
I did graduate work in the field of Soil Science and chemistry and there were many examples of where improved management practices made huge improvements, but the phosphate ban wasn't extended to dishwasher detergent, and coupled with other issues there are still problems, but it should be noted that things overall are better than they were. I worked with agriculture producers for years and I can tell you that there are plenty of ways to improve things without costs to producers. Being smarter about things doesn't cost more money and often saves money. There are plenty of ways to improve phosphate take-up and reduce runoff that may well involve costs to producers and I think it's reasonable for them to seek compensation for it. It's not a cost...it's a trade. We'd have rivers that don't make us and our kids sick, are easy to use as a drinking water source and are also more productive for people who like to fish. The exchange is another 4 cents a pound for beef....seems like a bargain for a better place to live. Now-a-days though, in many parts of the world, phosphates come from poorly treated sewage more than agriculture.
timbrframr is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-04-2019, 02:00 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Country: Canada
First Name: Brent
Posts: 149
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertRatTom View Post
An excellent point. Thanks for presenting it so well. This brings the issue back to earth and worth pursuing. The extreme predictions foment resistance, a more balanced approach might elicit real cooperation. Homeostasis can probably be achieved at multiple levels of atmospheric percentages. A new ice age would probably balance population with resources, but humans would not appreciate the resulting die off as arable land is buried in ice.
In a world that's getting more polarized all the time, there are crickets chirping in the middle ground where most everything actually resides IMHO! That said, I do believe unchecked climate change will be a giant pain in the butt for our children and grandchildren. However, driving at a ditch at 60MPH is only terrifying if you don't turn the wheel to stay between the lines. I think if we stopped bickering, we can turn the wheel with FAR less expense and compromise than will be asked of people we'll never meet. I have faith in the collective power and ingenuity of our global set of scientists and engineers to solve the problem.

I see some very easy starting steps which can serve to make things better while we continue to collect data for the people yet to be convinced. Many many many people are coming to see that electric cars just make a lot of sense for them, even if they had no environmental benefits at all. Are they perfect??? Of course not (middle ground!) but a huge proportion of the population can use them without issue and that would help a lot. So maybe it makes sense to partner with organizations to improve battery tech (including recyclability etc) such that electric cars are more available to people and are even cleaner. This would help people, make their lives better and also help with the ACC issue. Now I can hear the chorus of people out there (because this always happens in these discussion!) screaming :"I need my Turbo Diesel F350 for hauling stuff for work!!!" Well then keep using it until something better is available! There will be more fuel available for you without cars using it up that don't really need it.

Now we can talk/argue all day long and into the night about the particular example I chose, but that's not really the point. My point is there are countless ways we can do things that are better for US as well as help with the ACC issue. So for now, let's stop bickering and get to work on the stuff we can all agree on, and meanwhile the scientists will continue to learn more and be able to produce even more convincing arguments for those who still need more convincing.
timbrframr is online now  
post #93 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-05-2019, 01:29 AM
Moderation Team
 
Cherryville Chuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Country: Canada
First Name: Charles
Posts: 15,262
 
Default

I found a video of a documentary on youtube that was made in the UK. It's long but really quite good and worth watching all of it. One thing I found particularly interesting was how the global warming hoax got started.
Stick486 likes this.

Someone I consider a master woodworker once told me that a master woodworker is not someone who never makes mistakes. He is someone who is able to cover them up so that no one can tell.
Cherryville Chuck is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #94 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-05-2019, 09:41 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Country: Canada
First Name: Brent
Posts: 149
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cherryville Chuck View Post
I found a video of a documentary on youtube that was made in the UK. It's long but really quite good and worth watching all of it. One thing I found particularly interesting was how the global warming hoax got started.
Some people are just wired to love conspiracy theories I guess....so much so that they're inclined to abandon logic and reason. The propaganda in the film is mostly a collection of the same old pseudoscience bunk long ago addressed by countless people properly trained in the field, and supported by independent, objective experts. The film makers had to retract and apologize for much of the content when they were disciplined by broadcasting authorities and the courts for lying and distorting the truth.

Sometimes I assume that people don't know how the science works. They act like ACC is a theory promoted by 3 pocket protector nerds in some basement somewhere. They don't realize that the THOUSANDS of scientist conducting this work all around the world, have countless different educational, social and cultural backgrounds...they work in countless different research organizations, they use data independently collected and analysed and they all come to the same conclusions. On top of that, they expose their work to others for scrutiny. But instead of assuming that "HEY! There must be something to this!" they instead resort to some conspiracy for which there is no evidence. All these people, all over the globe (most of whom have never met eachother!) are somehow all part of this enormous scheme to trick us all into lowering emissions.....for some reason nobody can explain. And somehow, all these thousands of scientists have managed to keep this giant conspiracy secret from everybody for years and years except a few sleuthy folks tied to the oil and gas industry! Any time the denier camp tries a scientific argument they fail, so they have to resort to conspiratorial assertions. Oh but wait! I forgot about the "journals-don't-allow-dissenting-opinions" conspiracy/assertion.

If people would just step back and look at it all objectively, they would realize just how unreasonable it is to assume this is all some global trick concocted by devious scientists trying to get rich. I know plenty of scientists, and none of them are rich....CC funding goes to their research, not their salaries. There is however, lots of money in oil and gas but in fairness, Shell is saying the science is sound and it's stupid to deny it. I wonder how that feeds into the conspiracy theories??
timbrframr is online now  
post #95 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-05-2019, 11:20 AM
Moderation Team
 
Cherryville Chuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Country: Canada
First Name: Charles
Posts: 15,262
 
Default

You know Brent discrediting everyone who doesn't agree with your point of view only works with millennials. It doesn't hold up well with us older guys. You have failed to name a scientist who supports your point of view as does everyone else who sides with you. Those scientists always tend to remain unnamed. Furthermore you've failed to say how their facts are flawed. Such as the lag time in CO2 levels with previous warming periods. As pointed out in that video the lag time was always about 800 years. 800 years lag time is conclusive proof that the temperature rise was independent from any effects of CO2 and CO2 may have not played any role in temperature whatsoever during those periods. I know exactly how science works and there has never been any proof that CO2 affects climate. While we are able to tell what CO2 levels have been in the past what we don't know is whether they affected climate. We think they can but only in great enough quantity. Dyson said that too and I have no idea what you've read that makes you think he supported ACC. Everything I've seen from him said the opposite. He said CO2 is a greenhouse gas not that it has now or ever affected climate. It may be capable of it. As someone who trained in physics I can tell with certainty that in order for you to predict an outcome you have to have a good data set. That doesn't exist. We have some weather measurements that go back 150 or so years and before that it was observational information about hot or cold, wet or drought, and ice or ice free. There were no measurements of all the various possible factors which include cosmic rays.

In that video and in other media I've seen the consensus was that water vapour played the major role in warming. This is easily observable. If it clears off at night this time of year here the night will be cold. Cloudy and it won't be. The water vapour in the clouds is what is holding the heat in.

You said that my black body/white body example was flawed. How? It dealt specifically with the mechanics of how the CO2 molecule is supposed to affect climate, i.e. by bouncing the radiation back down to the ground again. The only way it was flawed is that it was a 2 dimensional representation of the problem when it is actually 3 dimensional. In a 3 dimensional setting if the radiation strikes near the edge of the molecule it will ricochet off at an angle, possibly still into outer space. So where my example assumed 100% reflection the real scenario won't possibly achieve 100%. If you disagree with that then quit spouting talking points and actually share some of your brilliance with us.

As I said, discrediting everyone who disagrees with you only works for a very short time. Dr. Judith Curry has 140 scientific papers to her name and has taught at several prestigious universities including Georgia Tech. She sounds like someone who should be listened to. Here is a small part of Tony Heller's bio.

BS Geology, Arizona State University
Masters Electrical Engineering, Rice University
Boston University Geology
Northern Arizona University Computer Science
Colorado State University Computer Science
University of New Mexico Geochemistry

Lifelong environmentalist.
I testified at my first Congressional hearing in support of Wilderness in 1972.
I fought for the Clean Air and Water acts
Wilderness Ranger Cibola National Forest, New Mexico
Wilderness Ranger Santa Fe National Forest, New Mexico
Currently battling the City of Boulder, Colorado to stop development on the South Boulder Wetlands
Full time cyclist for all my local transportation, for the past 40 years

Doesn't exactly sound like someone who would be a shill for oil companies does he? His credentials and accomplishments are far too lengthy to post here but here's a link to the rest: https://realclimatescience.com/who-is-tony-heller/ Once again, he seems the kind of person you would want to pay attention to unlike the 2500 unnamed scientists. BTW, is 2500 all the pro side can come up with? That's a pittance.

If you want to talk conspiracy theories then let's talk about the Canadian government turfing out 100 years of actual measured data and replacing it with calculated data. The ONLY reason they would do that is that the actual data doesn't support their agenda. Couple that with the Spencer Fernando video of Katherine McKenna, our environment minister, admitting that she is lying about it and you have a smoking gun, not a conspiracy theory. And what about El Niņo and La Niņa? Thirty years ago that was all you heard about. If there was going to be an El Niņo then California could expect hot dry weather and brush fires. Wonder why you haven't heard anything about them lately? It's because the ocean affecting weather that much destroys the CO2 debate. Tony Heller's presentation to the Washington State Senate shows how NASA has changed the weather data every few years since about 2000. There are some conspiracies for you Brent.
harrysin and Stick486 like this.

Someone I consider a master woodworker once told me that a master woodworker is not someone who never makes mistakes. He is someone who is able to cover them up so that no one can tell.
Cherryville Chuck is online now  
post #96 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-05-2019, 01:00 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Country: South Africa
First Name: Biagio
Posts: 342
 
Send a message via Skype™ to Biagio
Default

@CC
Charles, I would value your opinion on the following article. It has over 11 000 signatories, contained in a supplemental file. But that is not the main point. It speaks to something you said, about not being able to state with confidence what may or may not have happened ages ago, and instead looks at measurable phenomena and correlations. Question: is this sound science?

https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/...biz088/5610806

This discussion was started then aborted on another thread, a few months back.
My position remains that I do not know what does or does not constitute and/or contribute to climate change, but I can readily sign up to actions that seem reasonable to do, in any case (e.g. population control, reducing plastics use, etc). I was horrified to read the other day, that there are rivers in New Zealand so polluted, that it is unsafe to swim in them (phosphate runoff, bacterial contamination, etc). New Zealand! I thought that only happened to us in Third World countries.
I wonder how come nobody has thought of a way to extract the phosphates from the water? They are quite expensive to produce from raw materials, might be cheaper to extract.

Last edited by Biagio; 11-05-2019 at 01:01 PM. Reason: Typo
Biagio is offline  
post #97 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-05-2019, 01:36 PM
Forum Contributor
 
DesertRatTom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
First Name: Tom
Posts: 16,685
 
Default

Biagio hit on the note that sounds true to me. What reasonable solutions can we implement now, locally, you and me, without bankrupting everyone and starving others. I really don't think there is much point in arguing about things we can't change, or are just too expensive and speculative to attack now. Definitely, let's go for pollution controls as much as we can. For example, why do we send ships for salvage to India where the leftover fuel oil, ballast sludge, lubricants, leaded paint and so on get washed out into the ocean? Maybe we should change the way we design ships.

Why do we buy stuff from heavily pulluting countries that spew poison into the atmosphere we all must share? Maybe we need to focus trade on countries that clean up their mess.

Why do we focus on punishing offenders instead rewarding solutions? Studies show that people are not really motivated by punishment, but become active problem solvers with rewards.

What an interesting string.
harrysin likes this.

The more I do, the less I accomplish.
DesertRatTom is online now  
post #98 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-05-2019, 02:02 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Country: South Africa
First Name: Biagio
Posts: 342
 
Send a message via Skype™ to Biagio
Default

@DRT
Tom, I am with you on the carrot versus stick story. Every time I hear some Pompous Ass economist talking about full pricing (i.e. higher tax), I feel like throwing a shoe at them. Easy to say Full Pricing when one lives in an ivory tower, but what about the poor slobs on or below the breadline, who still need hydrocarbons to live, i.e. a lot of the Third World?
Here is a “revolutionary” idea: how about a negative tax for doing the right thing? Might actually lower the cost of living, rather than pushing it up.
Had an interesting surprise today - had to go and buy a replacement blade for a Japanese 265 utility saw - I had dinged some teeth on the old blade, cutting into a hidden screw. For the first time in a very long time, the replacement did not cost more than the complete saw costva couple yers ago, in spite of a declining exchange rate. Calls for a single malt tonight.
Biagio is offline  
post #99 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-05-2019, 03:02 PM
Registered User
 
DaninVan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
First Name: Dan
Posts: 14,137
 
Default

" Calls for a single malt tonight."
-Biagio

Hell; live large, have a couple!


-Dan
DaninVan is offline  
post #100 of 336 (permalink) Old 11-05-2019, 03:48 PM
Forum Contributor
 
DesertRatTom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
First Name: Tom
Posts: 16,685
 
Default

I'd join you but taking antibiotics. But in a week or two, I may join you all with a bit of bourbon. Lots to celebrate now that we've solved the world's problems. I think we should invite Brent to join in the evening's festivities as well. This has made for a very lively and thorough discussion of what is usually a topic that sets tempers and emotions ablaze.
harrysin and jw2170 like this.

The more I do, the less I accomplish.
DesertRatTom is online now  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Router Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome