Katz-


I stated"As I said, I appreciate hearing other viewpoints on global warming. I don't know if it is solid proof either way. Makes sense but I am not a scientist. Good to hear different views and opinions."

As my post said, I am glad to hear different views and opinions. I said I do not know for certain.

Why your hostility?

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...lobal-warming/

I bet I know what some will say....I do not trust the source. So be it....I just wanted to present another side to this debate.

Originally Posted by buggyone

Gee, Dale,

This certainly is more pleasant a place to hang out since I have VillageGolfer on my IGNORE list. Sort of like swatting a buzzing gnat.

Just wonderin'? If you have VillageGolfer on your ignore list, can you even see his first post since he started this thread? And if you can't, why would you comment on his post if you can't see it to know what he said?
Just wonderin'....?

I saw the title of the posting and was curious. I undeleted VillageGolfer to see what he wrote and posted - and have put him back on IGNORE now.

Originally Posted by buggyone

I saw the title of the posting and was curious. I undeleted VillageGolfer to see what he wrote and posted - and have put him back on IGNORE now.

Well, if you do that...that's going to make your blood pressure go up and down...and that doesn't sound too good for your health.

It just sounds like you're defeating the whole purpose of the IGNORE button...just sayin'.

Originally Posted by buggyone

I saw the title of the posting and was curious. I undeleted VillageGolfer to see what he wrote and posted - and have put him back on IGNORE now.

My blood pressure has dropped 30 Pt's since I blocked two folks. No offense meant, just that I don't need their aggressive hateful attitudes in my life. There are so many good folks on the board, missing the posts of two negative posters can only benefit my health and help me find possible solutions to problems rather than create some from nothing but childishness.

Originally Posted by rubicon

The profit motive is powerful an obviously it "cuts" as much as it "kicks". Also some such as scientist get so invested in their research that they lose all objectivity. Profit motive for Apple brought us break through technology. Profit motive for climate control because it has been based on deception has bankrupt a number of "green" start ups the sad thing is that some of this green technology may well lead to something great. so the Al gore's of the world did us a disservice

I agree with you rubicon, that's why I have so many doubts about the cap and tax bill. It seems to be anti-growth?

Well, Villager II, I do not have a blood pressure problem but it sure make this forum a lot more pleasant without those two sniping at absolutely everything I would post.

It is funny to see at least one of the two still posting something directly after I do - but the message does not show up on my screen. I love it.

I wish you would start a thread of your own about ignoring . I hope your blood pressure goes down, maybe it was contributing to this man-made global warming?

The topic of global warming generates a great deal of heat but very little light. There are several things that we know and a number of things we do not know. We have an almost endless supply of data, but very little knowledge. As Einstein said, “Information is not knowledge.” However, there are several things we do know. Among these are:

1. The earth is in an interglacial cycle. This cycle began around 15,000 years ago when ice laid 3 miles thick over what is now Chicago and sea level was some 300 feet lower than it is today.
2. The earth has warmed and cooled during this last 15,000 years including such periods as the medieval warming period and the little ice age.
3. The rate of sea level rise shows no evidence of significant change at this time. Sea level has obviously risen during this interglacial period and continues to do so. The best estimate of the current rate of rise is 2mm per year (less than one foot per century).
4. There is no ‘normal’ climate during an interglacial period. The earth’s normal climate is glacial, a prospect that makes any suggested level of global warming seem very desirable.
5. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, however its effect is logarithmic not linear. The best way to explain its impact that I have found is an analogy to a piece of plate glass being painted with successive thin costs of paint. The first coat cuts light transmission dramatically, the second less so, the third by a negligible amount, etc.
6. The United States is not the largest emitter of greenhouse gases and nothing we do will slow the increase in environmental CO2 levels. Coal is the most efficient fuel for the generation of electricity and world usage is expected to skyrocket.

BBQMan - Your #6 was one reason I was so against Kyoto. There's no reason on the planet for India and China to get a 'free pass' when it comes to the idea of enforcing emissions standards. If one has to abide by the law, ALL have to abide.

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice,
I think I know enough of hate,
To go with those who favor fire....

Or some such thing.....

Originally Posted by BBQMan;389***

The topic of global warming generates a great deal of heat but very little light. There are several things that we know and a number of things we do not know. We have an almost endless supply of data, but very little knowledge. As Einstein said, “Information is not knowledge.” However, there are several things we do know. Among these are:

1. The earth is in an interglacial cycle. This cycle began around 15,000 years ago when ice laid 3 miles thick over what is now Chicago and sea level was some 300 feet lower than it is today.
2. The earth has warmed and cooled during this last 15,000 years including such periods as the medieval warming period and the little ice age.
3. The rate of sea level rise shows no evidence of significant change at this time. Sea level has obviously risen during this interglacial period and continues to do so. The best estimate of the current rate of rise is 2mm per year (less than one foot per century).
4. There is no ‘normal’ climate during an interglacial period. The earth’s normal climate is glacial, a prospect that makes any suggested level of global warming seem very desirable.
5. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, however its effect is logarithmic not linear. The best way to explain its impact that I have found is an analogy to a piece of plate glass being painted with successive thin costs of paint. The first coat cuts light transmission dramatically, the second less so, the third by a negligible amount, etc.
6. The United States is not the largest emitter of greenhouse gases and nothing we do will slow the increase in environmental CO2 levels. Coal is the most efficient fuel for the generation of electricity and world usage is expected to skyrocket.

Very good BBQMan. Do you think the sun controls these cycles?

is there a reason no one is responding to my previous post?

Originally Posted by waynet

is there a reason no one is responding to my previous post?

I'm not trying to be cute, but maybe the ignore list might be responsible. Seems some people would rather close their ears and minds rather then listening to reason.