Weather Channel Co-Founder slams Feds climate report

a reply to: Mike6623

I never said climate change is not happening. The global warming debate is a distraction from bigger problems.

Deforestation and desertification do have a direct result on an areas local climate.

originally posted by: namehere
a reply to: Greven

visible from space with the naked eye? no it's not, it's more like visible from satellite cameras that can zoom in from space not the "naked eye", besides the only naked eyes to see from space have never been used to survey any such thing so how can you claim such a thing like it's fact?

besides even if it were true such a fact is no indication of whether we can affect the climate on a grand scale or not.

It's big enough to be seen.

Bingham Canyon is also the biggest hole on earth. As the largest of all man-made excavations, Bingham Canyon is more than a half-mile deep. If the world's tallest building, the 1,454-foot-high Sears Tower, were placed at the bottom of the pit, it would reach only halfway to the mine's rim. The Bingham Canyon open pit stretches more than 2.5 miles (4km) across at the rim and covers 2,000 acres. Its immensity makes it the only manmade feature visible to the naked eye from the orbiting space shuttle.

If you're going to critique someone, at least be right.

Think about it - the smallest lunar features we can see are about 200km across. We're comparatively pretty far from the Moon: 384,400 km away; being able to distinguish 200km features implies that we should be able to distinguish a 4km feature with the naked eye from over 7500 km. Guess how far the ISS is from Earth? 354 km.

a reply to: DeepImpactX

Until people can figure out how to change things ON the planet, I'm never going to believe they have the capability to change things ABOVE the planet. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

I am just saying here.......

This is getting so old.

I'd bet anything that the Mayans, Aztecs, Romans and all the rest of the collapsed civilisations that raped the earth and shat in their own back yard probably all used climate change to divert the discussion away from the real truth. That they wasted all their resources and polluted their own living space.

Climate change is not the issue here. Arguing about it only puts us deeper into the actual mess we're making.

originally posted by: CaticusMaximus

Gah... who am I kidding... they wont get it then, either.

Apparently these Scientist don't get it either. All 30,000 of them.

USA population accounts for 4.4% of world population, I don't get why we are the only asked to make sacrifices, even it were true that it's mans culpability.

They can't even predict the weather for the weekend properly why should I believe there computer weather model predictions? If they are so accurate short term weather predictions should be easy.

Seems to me you don't get it.

originally posted by: MarlinGrace

originally posted by: CaticusMaximus

Gah... who am I kidding... they wont get it then, either.

Apparently these Scientist don't get it either. All 30,000 of them.

USA population accounts for 4.4% of world population, I don't get why we are the only asked to make sacrifices, even it were true that it's mans culpability.

They can't even predict the weather for the weekend properly why should I believe there computer weather model predictions? If they are so accurate short term weather predictions should be easy.

Seems to me you don't get it.

4% of the worlds population accounts for 17% of the pollution, Yeah those numbers are "fair".


Seriously, this is arguing that the worlds clean enough lets just continue as we are.

Its like saying my house is clean enough so I can crap on the living room rug, I mean its so clean no one will care right?

a reply to: MarlinGrace


The weather man on local channels are trying to predict the weather however that doesn't have much to do with the issue as the subject really is the climate. Climate is the all encompassing subject of the overall picture including the weather anomalies.

The weather is localized to specific areas and small time frames climate is looked at globally. So while it may be snowing in Montana during the winter in the other hemisphere Austrailians are experiencing the hottest temperatures of their lifetime. When it is said the climate is warming that is derived from an average of temperatures across the globe.

Do people really not get this? Arggh of course they don't that is why the same comments keep being made even though its been explained thousands of times.


Oh and China is starting to address the issue.

China declares war on pollution

Last week, the government passed sweeping amendments to its environmental protection laws — the first changes in 25 years — imposing tougher penalties for polluters and making it easier for whistleblowers and advocates to report polluting companies. When it goes into effect next January, the law will establish "environmental protection as the country's basic policy."
The amendments passed this month mark the latest in a series of recent moves to curb pollution in China, where environmental concerns have become a hot political issue. Late last year, the government announced its first national plan to combat climate change, and it has already committed $280 billion to cleaning its air. In March, Premier Li Keqiang said China will "declare war" on pollution, describing the country's smog problems as "nature's red-light warning against inefficient and blind development."

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

In as were this whole climate thing stands I tend to agree with your statements. The climate has always changed and will always change, thought mankind can change the climate in various ways, even by some technologies, it is merely a short term patch up, many countries are doing it, but it all only lasts as long as its maintained, none of which are not sustainable in any long term scenarios, so yes you can make it rain in the desert, but not forever, and after lifetimes it will still be a desert, ultimately it does not really mean much. Humans have always changed there enviorment to suit them, but mostly they have changed to suit there environment, people living in Afghanistan or Dubai or Siberia can attest to that just as much as those living in the more lush parts of the world.


I mean sure you can drill a giant hole into the ground from space, or build giant dams. But what of it? One ice age is all it would take to turn it all to ruble and bury any remnants of it all. And after all that you still cant predict all that accurately if its going to rain or not next week even with satellites in space, if they did then people maybe could plan barbecues more accurately instead of all ending up there on Saturday and going "I thought you said it wasn't going to rain" " hey man dont blame me it was on the tube" I mean, Its cool and all, what with all these advances and technologies, but maybe were just not asking the right questions to this global change phenomenon. And after all that it still remains the most accurate way to predict the weather is the seasons.

Guy Who's Been Screaming About Climate Science For Years Continues To Scream About Climate Science After Latest Climate Science Report

I fixed your headline for you.

originally posted by: benrl

originally posted by: MarlinGrace

originally posted by: CaticusMaximus

Gah... who am I kidding... they wont get it then, either.

Apparently these Scientist don't get it either. All 30,000 of them.

USA population accounts for 4.4% of world population, I don't get why we are the only asked to make sacrifices, even it were true that it's mans culpability.

They can't even predict the weather for the weekend properly why should I believe there computer weather model predictions? If they are so accurate short term weather predictions should be easy.

Seems to me you don't get it.

4% of the worlds population accounts for 17% of the pollution, Yeah those numbers are "fair".


Seriously, this is arguing that the worlds clean enough lets just continue as we are.

Its like saying my house is clean enough so I can crap on the living room rug, I mean its so clean no one will care right?

What I am arguing is 4% can't fix the other 96%, to use your example, is if all the neighbors in your neighborhood put their trash in the street and you had yours removed, then ask you to clean the whole street. Where is the fairness in that?

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: MarlinGrace


The weather man on local channels are trying to predict the weather however that doesn't have much to do with the issue as the subject really is the climate. Climate is the all encompassing subject of the overall picture including the weather anomalies.

The weather is localized to specific areas and small time frames climate is looked at globally. So while it may be snowing in Montana during the winter in the other hemisphere Austrailians are experiencing the hottest temperatures of their lifetime. When it is said the climate is warming that is derived from an average of temperatures across the globe.

Do people really not get this? Arggh of course they don't that is why the same comments keep being made even though its been explained thousands of times.


Oh and China is starting to address the issue.

China declares war on pollution

Last week, the government passed sweeping amendments to its environmental protection laws — the first changes in 25 years — imposing tougher penalties for polluters and making it easier for whistleblowers and advocates to report polluting companies. When it goes into effect next January, the law will establish "environmental protection as the country's basic policy."
The amendments passed this month mark the latest in a series of recent moves to curb pollution in China, where environmental concerns have become a hot political issue. Late last year, the government announced its first national plan to combat climate change, and it has already committed $280 billion to cleaning its air. In March, Premier Li Keqiang said China will "declare war" on pollution, describing the country's smog problems as "nature's red-light warning against inefficient and blind development."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seriously China declaring war on pollution?

Pollution in China makes surveillance cameras obsolete

You make my point exactly they can't get local weather right what makes anyone think they can get it right globally?

cli·mate [klahy-mit] Show IPA
noun
1.
the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region, as temperature, air pressure, humidity, precipitation, sunshine, cloudiness, and winds, throughout the year, averaged over a series of years.

So yeah climate does have a little to do with the weather. As I said, can't get Saturday you can't get 10 years from now. What was predicted 10 years ago hasn't happened yet either. Go figure...

Seventeen years of data is really not that much to go on to ascertain an overall trend. Taking a subset of numbers from a larger set to make an assessment of the big picture is pure idiocy.

Being a co-founder of the Weather Channel says nothing about his expertise. He may be good at starting a successful business but his moronic interpretation of weather data shows he knows nothing about what he is talking about.

I'd have to agree, the government data from what I have seen was vague. If they could predict a precise outcome, there would be many weather scientists getting rich from winning the lottery.

originally posted by: Greven

Have you heard of the Salton Sea?

Yes, and I would hardly call drilling holes into the earth to tap into the natural resources in order to make electricity......effecting the weather patterns. What we're talking about, the geothermal activity, is a natural occurrence. If tapping into that changes the weather patterns, it's by happenstance. To put it bluntly, no one is impressed if someone changes the weather by f***ing up the earth because they didn't have the foresight to see the consequences of their actions. Same with fracking, and if YOU did your research you would know that what drilling they did or still do, is happening on the San Andreas fault. Classy.

So if the day ever comes when someone can convince me that man can rule nature, I will own up to being wrong. But I'll bet anything that that proof will come by way something that has had a drastic and negative effect because that's about all I see happening from the "all wise one's" at this point.

a reply to: mark1167

Why? You are, I presume, working on the assumption that co2 is a huge contributing factor to global warming... But you see, 17 years... NO warming... co2 levels have gone UP... So, how can you explain that?

If co2 was the big contributing factor they said it is then we should see bigger and bigger rises in temps... We don't...

It makes me sad to see people looking at normal weather and saying "Oh my god, we had a storm with winds and rain etc" It's ALL normal! Every now and then you'll have super storm too or something else just as crazy right out of nowhere! This has gone on since the dawn of time...

TO ALL AGW BELIEVERS...

I have a question... Do you agree we had ice ages in the past without humans pumping out co2? Do you agree we had warm periods hotter than today? So would you not say that these events were natural?

Now the real question... How do you know that stopping this natural system will be good? Say you could stop it and bring temps down, how do you know that is good? Also if we were to keep the temp the same forever, would we not being going AGAINST nature to suit our own needs?

originally posted by: DeepImpactX
Yes, and I would hardly call drilling holes into the earth to tap into the natural resources in order to make electricity......effecting the weather patterns. What we're talking about, the geothermal activity, is a natural occurrence. If tapping into that changes the weather patterns, it's by happenstance. To put it bluntly, no one is impressed if someone changes the weather by f***ing up the earth because they didn't have the foresight to see the consequences of their actions.

Unsurprisingly, you've moved the goalposts that you had set.

I don't see what relevance the San Andreas has to either me or this discussion.

originally posted by: Meee32
Why? You are, I presume, working on the assumption that co2 is a huge contributing factor to global warming... But you see, 17 years... NO warming... co2 levels have gone UP... So, how can you explain that?

Assuming this 17 years thing is accurate, here is a suggestion as to why it might be a bit lower - much of those 17 years is during a solar minimum.
data.giss.nasa.gov...
lasp.colorado.edu...

a reply to: Meee32

So, how can you explain that?

The oceans.

17 years 9 months? what was that spike? Not saying it is global warming because idc about climate change or weather day to day. Just curious. I think Fukushima would have a bigger impact on our globe than co2. Besides, co2 is naturally occuring. Volcanic erruptions put millions of times more co2 into the air as humans do through Earths history.

a reply to: Greven

As to why it might be a bit lower??? NO warming for 17 years... non... co2 UP, temps, no change... So you think it's the solar minimum and the guy below thinks it's the sea... which was there all along btw so fail to see what difference that makes...

I believe the sun is the main driving factor for temps certainly and the fact remains it has happened before without us even being here! It has nothing to do with us! If this temp rise had never been seen before, fine... It has, many times! Maybe the earth NEEDS to do it? Maybe if we stop it we'll have blowback somewhere else?

There are no guarantees stopping the cycle would be good for earth right?

originally posted by: Meee32
a reply to: Greven

As to why it might be a bit lower??? NO warming for 17 years... non... co2 UP, temps, no change... So you think it's the solar minimum and the guy below thinks it's the sea... which was there all along btw so fail to see what difference that makes...

I believe the sun is the main driving factor for temps certainly and the fact remains it has happened before without us even being here! It has nothing to do with us! If this temp rise had never been seen before, fine... It has, many times! Maybe the earth NEEDS to do it? Maybe if we stop it we'll have blowback somewhere else?

There are no guarantees stopping the cycle would be good for earth right?

I agree. Earth has been here with life for millions of years (I'm sure someone will tell me that number is wrong), I don't think we need to worry about Earth or the Sun. Worry about the life on the planet. Don't liter, stop nuclear waist, war, weapons, and power plants from polluting our resources, and don't worry about fossil fuels, they are renewable. I run dinosaur in my gas tank, don't tell me they aren't renewable.