All Things Environment

[Trinity]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

[youthathletics]

Interesting how the Cooling Degree Days by state is not consistent with temperature change based on the delta of of the 60 year criteria for the entire lower 48. No way to insert interactive map in this bbcode site, But if you click this link there is an interactive map on the middle of the page right side of the site. Also quite interesting is the South, with the exception of Florida has measured less cooling degree days.

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/ ... egree-days

[runrussellrun]

The great thing about science is that anyone can go out there and try to prove current theories wrong. Question everything, that's what great scientists do!

God knows the oil & gas companies spent tons of cash trying to do just that, but the data wasn't on their side. So they lied about it (just like the tobacco industry).

So when YOUR favorite MSM outlet does NOT report on a story, they are liars? Petro companies never lied about their research. When asked, they produced the "may" "if" " possibly " reports where they concluded that burning more carbon based fuel will produce more co2. Wow, who knew?

You called them liars, prove it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobi ... ontroversy to start

Everything in this poorly written wiki page supports my claim, especially the sharing of research information. Sharing with the public, UNIVERSITIES, etc.

Equating cancer and other tobacco use problems to more co2 (no duh, more people, more co2 ), parts per million increase and a YEARLY average increase of a few degrees (very skeptical about the data) ,has caused how many deaths again? Its nonsense and you know it.

[runrussellrun]

Isolated weather stations above the arctic circle reporting 90-95 F temps in late July. Something you don't see every day Chauncy - at least not in the past.

Clearly, you don't know the difference between climate and the weather. Clearly

[runrussellrun]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Swim, spawn, die. The color of these fish CLEARLY indicate salmon that have spawned and died. MSM figures most city dwellers wouldn't know the difference. Got you convinced.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

[Typical Lax Dad]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

[runrussellrun]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

[Typical Lax Dad]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

[runrussellrun]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

For today, no it's not. But, to your point of sticking data, you should be upset with Sue Mauger/ Cookeeper uses ONE data point.


16 words, have to cull 6, to get to your usual snarky, 10 words or less, comments.

Sticking with single data point's is similar to crime rates and shootings...... ...12....

Using Single data points, usefullness, is equalevant to zero shootings and crime rates. 13

I think I am bashing you, by pointing out single data points and how it's just silly to rely on them. 21......but you get the point
And, I agree.....but how many good posters DO do precisely that, and YOU nevah call them out on it. hypocrite. at least three SINGLE DATA POINT comments/links were posted out of the last 15 or so........and not one 10 words or less sardonic comment from you....to them. Why is that?

[youthathletics]

Narrative?...1...

[Typical Lax Dad]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

For today, no it's not. But, to your point of sticking data, you should be upset with Sue Mauger/ Cookeeper uses ONE data point.


16 words, have to cull 6, to get to your usual snarky, 10 words or less, comments.

Sticking with single data point's is similar to crime rates and shootings...... ...12....

Using Single data points, usefullness, is equalevant to zero shootings and crime rates. 13

I think I am bashing you, by pointing out single data points and how it's just silly to rely on them. 21......but you get the point
And, I agree.....but how many good posters DO do precisely that, and YOU nevah call them out on it. hypocrite. at least three SINGLE DATA POINT comments/links were posted out of the last 15 or so........and not one 10 words or less sardonic comment from you....to them. Why is that?

I don’t know. I am not a conspiracy theorist and have just enough knowledge about science to pay attention. Doesn’t mean scientists are always right and it sure as hell doesn’t mean they are always wrong. Sometimes it is common sense used in conjunction with scientific findings. You are free to believe that man has no impact on “global warming” and the science around it is just wrong. We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

[cradleandshoot]

"You are all wrapped up in your security blanket of scientific knowledge you believe them to be incapable of ever being wrong."

I get some fun out of eliciting statements like this one (to quote only one of your routinely preposterous statements), because, well, you're wrong about me. FIrst, my knickers aren't twisted; I am 60 and have lived a really good life already. I'm not worried that my life will be much affected by climate change; it just concerns me that so much data is out there and we are, as with many issues, unable to come to even a broad consensus about what to do at a policy level.

I trust the science to the extent that I trust people devoted to the inquiry may -- see that? may -- have a point, and that if -- see that? if -- they are right, our behavior globally and locally might have to change. For me, it's a hedge against a future that I might not like. I don't pretend to be certain about this stuff, but I care enough about the planet and my children and my nieces and nephews to err on the side of caution. You seem to just bumble along jettisoning silly stuff like facts and data and science. It may seem unkind to say it, but your views are not "homespun." They're just shortsighted and stupid.

Homespun has never been me. I think any individual... scientist or the bum on the corner that believes they can predict what the planet will do or be in 50 years is similarly as stupid as you believe me to be. I am lucky enough to have been endowed by my creator with something none of you environmental extremists seem to know anything about... common sense. I am more than happy to let you gullible morons let your imaginations run wild with every prediction of cataclysmic disaster that warms your little hearts. My beliefs will never change... planet earth will do what it wants... when it wants... where it wants and how it wants. The fact you believe as an insignificant human being that you have the power to change or alter that fact is testimony to your own stupidity. Answer me this my good friend... do you also have the ability to prevent the massive eruption in Yellowstone that will eventually happen? The only advice a stupid person such as me can give you... dont worry about stuff you have no control over. I know that is a very difficult concept for you to grasp. I am so very lucky to be as stupid as I am that even that simple truth is something I have always understood. Have yourself a great day and as the song goes... don't worry... be happy.

Seems to me that cradle articulates well what the scientific world is up against, environmental flat-earthism.

God (my creator) gives me common sense, and common sense, not data, tells me not to worry about what I, individually, can't control.

God will handle it.

Scientists should butt out.

It's been awhile ( not ever?) since we've had a 'flat-earth' science denier in the White House, but that's the case right now. Thankfully, that's not likely to continue much longer. And, thankfully, we're not yet throwing scientists into jail or burning them at the stake, but we are cutting off their funding, moving whole departments and agencies to the boonies to encourage retirement, etc. Serious damage being done. Give Trump another 4 years and the damage will be much worse.

I am an admitted failure at organized religion. I do believe in God even if I don't understand the big picture. I have taken untold hikes through the awesomeness that is our planet. If I am to believe the scientists it is an evolution from that primordial slime that we all crawled out of. Bull freaking buffalo chips to that. Nothing as beautiful as I have observed happened just by accident. My words to you MD come from St Thomas Aquinas

" To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible" MD I hold you firmly in the latter. Your flat earther stuff was so pathetic on my part... I am not as stupid and gullible as you may think I am. You go ahead and believe what the extremist scientist are preaching to you. I am just stupid enough to understand our planet will decide, being the perfect self correcting mechanism that it is, how it will deal with what it believes to be threats to it. You think that us insignificant human beings can regulate and spend enough money to reverse course of whatever is going to happen. I think anyone that believes we can change direction of what the planet will do is peeing into a very strong wind.

We should ALL be good stewards of the planet doing what we can control. The arrogance of people who think that we can reverse whatever is going to happen by the asinine solutions put forth by so many environmental special interest groups. You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about internal combustion engines? You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about how many hamburgers we eat? You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about cow farts? You think the planet cares about carbon credits? You think the planet cares about renewable energy? George Carlin nailed it when he said the planet will be fine. He nailed it even more when he proclaimed that the people are... lets clean it up... fouled up. Fouled up people sadly seem to predominate the discussion here. They think they can control things that they have no control over. That won't stop them from trying. they will spend as many trillions as it takes to chase their tail around in circles

My last point MD goes back to that bubbling little old Caldera over at Yellowstone. It will have a catastrophic eruption sooner rather than later. Can scientists figure out a way to stop a volcanic eruption that could destroy almost half of the USA? Do I want that to happen... hell no I don't. Do you think we can prevent it from happening? My point remains the same... planet earth will do what it wants, when it wants, where it wants and how it wants. These braniac scientists have about as much of a possibility of preventing a volcanic eruption as they do from saving the planet from global whatever they are calling it today. There is a boatload of money to be made by the right people being able to con enough other folks into believing the CC/GW con job. It has NEVER been about saving the freaking planet. It is about two very basic objectives... special interest groups using it to advance their beliefs and the realization that there is money to be made in advancing their objective.

Gonna have me a nice prime rib dinner tonight with a clear conscience that planet earth doen't care one way or another. Hell I am probably doing my part to save the planet... one less cow to fart...

[cradleandshoot]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

For today, no it's not. But, to your point of sticking data, you should be upset with Sue Mauger/ Cookeeper uses ONE data point.


16 words, have to cull 6, to get to your usual snarky, 10 words or less, comments.

Sticking with single data point's is similar to crime rates and shootings...... ...12....

Using Single data points, usefullness, is equalevant to zero shootings and crime rates. 13

I think I am bashing you, by pointing out single data points and how it's just silly to rely on them. 21......but you get the point
And, I agree.....but how many good posters DO do precisely that, and YOU nevah call them out on it. hypocrite. at least three SINGLE DATA POINT comments/links were posted out of the last 15 or so........and not one 10 words or less sardonic comment from you....to them. Why is that?

I don’t know. I am not a conspiracy theorist and have just enough knowledge about science to pay attention. Doesn’t mean scientists are always right and it sure as hell doesn’t mean they are always wrong. Sometimes it is common sense used in conjunction with scientific findings. You are free to believe that man has no impact on “global warming” and the science around it is just wrong. We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

[cradleandshoot]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

For today, no it's not. But, to your point of sticking data, you should be upset with Sue Mauger/ Cookeeper uses ONE data point.


16 words, have to cull 6, to get to your usual snarky, 10 words or less, comments.

Sticking with single data point's is similar to crime rates and shootings...... ...12....

Using Single data points, usefullness, is equalevant to zero shootings and crime rates. 13

I think I am bashing you, by pointing out single data points and how it's just silly to rely on them. 21......but you get the point
And, I agree.....but how many good posters DO do precisely that, and YOU nevah call them out on it. hypocrite. at least three SINGLE DATA POINT comments/links were posted out of the last 15 or so........and not one 10 words or less sardonic comment from you....to them. Why is that?

I don’t know. I am not a conspiracy theorist and have just enough knowledge about science to pay attention. Doesn’t mean scientists are always right and it sure as hell doesn’t mean they are always wrong. Sometimes it is common sense used in conjunction with scientific findings. You are free to believe that man has no impact on “global warming” and the science around it is just wrong. We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.
[/quote]
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile. Your sarcastic observation is something Roy Spencer has stated for quite awhile. Once all that co2 gas gets up in the atmosphere it is impossible to separate man made from naturally produced. The ASSUMPTION has been the increase has to be man made. That assumption continues to drive the discussion because there has been no real scientific study to actually determine where the increase is coming from. That is true science to the bone there. We don't know why it happens so it must be the simplest explanation possible... blame it on humans

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warm ... r-manmade/ Go ahead and hate him but these are his observations. Nobody has debunked them as far as I know

[MDlaxfan76]

"You are all wrapped up in your security blanket of scientific knowledge you believe them to be incapable of ever being wrong."

I get some fun out of eliciting statements like this one (to quote only one of your routinely preposterous statements), because, well, you're wrong about me. FIrst, my knickers aren't twisted; I am 60 and have lived a really good life already. I'm not worried that my life will be much affected by climate change; it just concerns me that so much data is out there and we are, as with many issues, unable to come to even a broad consensus about what to do at a policy level.

I trust the science to the extent that I trust people devoted to the inquiry may -- see that? may -- have a point, and that if -- see that? if -- they are right, our behavior globally and locally might have to change. For me, it's a hedge against a future that I might not like. I don't pretend to be certain about this stuff, but I care enough about the planet and my children and my nieces and nephews to err on the side of caution. You seem to just bumble along jettisoning silly stuff like facts and data and science. It may seem unkind to say it, but your views are not "homespun." They're just shortsighted and stupid.

Homespun has never been me. I think any individual... scientist or the bum on the corner that believes they can predict what the planet will do or be in 50 years is similarly as stupid as you believe me to be. I am lucky enough to have been endowed by my creator with something none of you environmental extremists seem to know anything about... common sense. I am more than happy to let you gullible morons let your imaginations run wild with every prediction of cataclysmic disaster that warms your little hearts. My beliefs will never change... planet earth will do what it wants... when it wants... where it wants and how it wants. The fact you believe as an insignificant human being that you have the power to change or alter that fact is testimony to your own stupidity. Answer me this my good friend... do you also have the ability to prevent the massive eruption in Yellowstone that will eventually happen? The only advice a stupid person such as me can give you... dont worry about stuff you have no control over. I know that is a very difficult concept for you to grasp. I am so very lucky to be as stupid as I am that even that simple truth is something I have always understood. Have yourself a great day and as the song goes... don't worry... be happy.

Seems to me that cradle articulates well what the scientific world is up against, environmental flat-earthism.

God (my creator) gives me common sense, and common sense, not data, tells me not to worry about what I, individually, can't control.

God will handle it.

Scientists should butt out.

It's been awhile ( not ever?) since we've had a 'flat-earth' science denier in the White House, but that's the case right now. Thankfully, that's not likely to continue much longer. And, thankfully, we're not yet throwing scientists into jail or burning them at the stake, but we are cutting off their funding, moving whole departments and agencies to the boonies to encourage retirement, etc. Serious damage being done. Give Trump another 4 years and the damage will be much worse.

I am an admitted failure at organized religion. I do believe in God even if I don't understand the big picture. I have taken untold hikes through the awesomeness that is our planet. If I am to believe the scientists it is an evolution from that primordial slime that we all crawled out of. Bull freaking buffalo chips to that. Nothing as beautiful as I have observed happened just by accident. My words to you MD come from St Thomas Aquinas

" To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible" MD I hold you firmly in the latter. Your flat earther stuff was so pathetic on my part... I am not as stupid and gullible as you may think I am. You go ahead and believe what the extremist scientist are preaching to you. I am just stupid enough to understand our planet will decide, being the perfect self correcting mechanism that it is, how it will deal with what it believes to be threats to it. You think that us insignificant human beings can regulate and spend enough money to reverse course of whatever is going to happen. I think anyone that believes we can change direction of what the planet will do is peeing into a very strong wind.

We should ALL be good stewards of the planet doing what we can control. The arrogance of people who think that we can reverse whatever is going to happen by the asinine solutions put forth by so many environmental special interest groups. You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about internal combustion engines? You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about how many hamburgers we eat? You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about cow farts? You think the planet cares about carbon credits? You think the planet cares about renewable energy? George Carlin nailed it when he said the planet will be fine. He nailed it even more when he proclaimed that the people are... lets clean it up... fouled up. Fouled up people sadly seem to predominate the discussion here. They think they can control things that they have no control over. That won't stop them from trying. they will spend as many trillions as it takes to chase their tail around in circles

My last point MD goes back to that bubbling little old Caldera over at Yellowstone. It will have a catastrophic eruption sooner rather than later. Can scientists figure out a way to stop a volcanic eruption that could destroy almost half of the USA? Do I want that to happen... hell no I don't. Do you think we can prevent it from happening? My point remains the same... planet earth will do what it wants, when it wants, where it wants and how it wants. These braniac scientists have about as much of a possibility of preventing a volcanic eruption as they do from saving the planet from global whatever they are calling it today. There is a boatload of money to be made by the right people being able to con enough other folks into believing the CC/GW con job. It has NEVER been about saving the freaking planet. It is about two very basic objectives... special interest groups using it to advance their beliefs and the realization that there is money to be made in advancing their objective.

Gonna have me a nice prime rib dinner tonight with a clear conscience that planet earth doen't care one way or another. Hell I am probably doing my part to save the planet... one less cow to fart...

Fascinating.
Not sure where you get the notion that I don't 'have faith', if that's what you mean by the 'latter' in Aquinas' words.

Perhaps you mean I don't have faith that the earth is some sort of sentient being, all powerful, capable of self-adjusting to whatever forces may act upon it, such that mankind shall continue to have an environment in which to thrive, or conversely to destroy mankind at it's sole will. Nope, I don't believe in that.

You are of course correct that there are natural forces way beyond man's current and likely future capacity to control. No argument there. In the very long run our sun is likely to explode, but the Earth will be a cinder long before then. But that's a very, very long run. Meanwhile...

But where the flat earth science denial comes in is the notion that mankind can have no significant impact upon the environment in which we live, including an impact upon climate. That seems simply preposterous to me on its face.

You call the scientists 'extremists', but this is the overwhelming consensus of those scientists who actually study this issue. Are they all 'extremists'???

But go ahead and stick your head in the sand, you won't be around when the bill for our errors comes due anyway.

To be sure, I too, would much prefer the notion that man has no responsibility for climate change, no responsibility to not destroy our planet. Simpler, no need to be concerned. But also cowardly.

Again, there's a legitimate discussion to be had about the tradeoffs between various policies and expenditures of resources to address the risks posed by climate change. What are the most effective policies, how to we adjust for new data, what are the costs of those choices? But we sure as heck better look to the 'brainiacs' in science to inform these discussions, not some flat earth faith in a self-adjusting planet!

[Typical Lax Dad]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

For today, no it's not. But, to your point of sticking data, you should be upset with Sue Mauger/ Cookeeper uses ONE data point.


16 words, have to cull 6, to get to your usual snarky, 10 words or less, comments.

Sticking with single data point's is similar to crime rates and shootings...... ...12....

Using Single data points, usefullness, is equalevant to zero shootings and crime rates. 13

I think I am bashing you, by pointing out single data points and how it's just silly to rely on them. 21......but you get the point
And, I agree.....but how many good posters DO do precisely that, and YOU nevah call them out on it. hypocrite. at least three SINGLE DATA POINT comments/links were posted out of the last 15 or so........and not one 10 words or less sardonic comment from you....to them. Why is that?

I don’t know. I am not a conspiracy theorist and have just enough knowledge about science to pay attention. Doesn’t mean scientists are always right and it sure as hell doesn’t mean they are always wrong. Sometimes it is common sense used in conjunction with scientific findings. You are free to believe that man has no impact on “global warming” and the science around it is just wrong. We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile. Your sarcastic observation is something Roy Spencer has stated for quite awhile. Once all that co2 gas gets up in the atmosphere it is impossible to separate man made from naturally produced. The ASSUMPTION has been the increase has to be man made. That assumption continues to drive the discussion because there has been no real scientific study to actually determine where the increase is coming from. That is true science to the bone there. We don't know why it happens so it must be the simplest explanation possible... blame it on humans

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warm ... r-manmade/ Go ahead and hate him but these are his observations. Nobody has debunked them as far as I know
[/quote]

Find someone else besides Roy Spencer.

[cradleandshoot]

"You are all wrapped up in your security blanket of scientific knowledge you believe them to be incapable of ever being wrong."

I get some fun out of eliciting statements like this one (to quote only one of your routinely preposterous statements), because, well, you're wrong about me. FIrst, my knickers aren't twisted; I am 60 and have lived a really good life already. I'm not worried that my life will be much affected by climate change; it just concerns me that so much data is out there and we are, as with many issues, unable to come to even a broad consensus about what to do at a policy level.

I trust the science to the extent that I trust people devoted to the inquiry may -- see that? may -- have a point, and that if -- see that? if -- they are right, our behavior globally and locally might have to change. For me, it's a hedge against a future that I might not like. I don't pretend to be certain about this stuff, but I care enough about the planet and my children and my nieces and nephews to err on the side of caution. You seem to just bumble along jettisoning silly stuff like facts and data and science. It may seem unkind to say it, but your views are not "homespun." They're just shortsighted and stupid.

Homespun has never been me. I think any individual... scientist or the bum on the corner that believes they can predict what the planet will do or be in 50 years is similarly as stupid as you believe me to be. I am lucky enough to have been endowed by my creator with something none of you environmental extremists seem to know anything about... common sense. I am more than happy to let you gullible morons let your imaginations run wild with every prediction of cataclysmic disaster that warms your little hearts. My beliefs will never change... planet earth will do what it wants... when it wants... where it wants and how it wants. The fact you believe as an insignificant human being that you have the power to change or alter that fact is testimony to your own stupidity. Answer me this my good friend... do you also have the ability to prevent the massive eruption in Yellowstone that will eventually happen? The only advice a stupid person such as me can give you... dont worry about stuff you have no control over. I know that is a very difficult concept for you to grasp. I am so very lucky to be as stupid as I am that even that simple truth is something I have always understood. Have yourself a great day and as the song goes... don't worry... be happy.

Seems to me that cradle articulates well what the scientific world is up against, environmental flat-earthism.

God (my creator) gives me common sense, and common sense, not data, tells me not to worry about what I, individually, can't control.

God will handle it.

Scientists should butt out.

It's been awhile ( not ever?) since we've had a 'flat-earth' science denier in the White House, but that's the case right now. Thankfully, that's not likely to continue much longer. And, thankfully, we're not yet throwing scientists into jail or burning them at the stake, but we are cutting off their funding, moving whole departments and agencies to the boonies to encourage retirement, etc. Serious damage being done. Give Trump another 4 years and the damage will be much worse.

I am an admitted failure at organized religion. I do believe in God even if I don't understand the big picture. I have taken untold hikes through the awesomeness that is our planet. If I am to believe the scientists it is an evolution from that primordial slime that we all crawled out of. Bull freaking buffalo chips to that. Nothing as beautiful as I have observed happened just by accident. My words to you MD come from St Thomas Aquinas

" To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible" MD I hold you firmly in the latter. Your flat earther stuff was so pathetic on my part... I am not as stupid and gullible as you may think I am. You go ahead and believe what the extremist scientist are preaching to you. I am just stupid enough to understand our planet will decide, being the perfect self correcting mechanism that it is, how it will deal with what it believes to be threats to it. You think that us insignificant human beings can regulate and spend enough money to reverse course of whatever is going to happen. I think anyone that believes we can change direction of what the planet will do is peeing into a very strong wind.

We should ALL be good stewards of the planet doing what we can control. The arrogance of people who think that we can reverse whatever is going to happen by the asinine solutions put forth by so many environmental special interest groups. You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about internal combustion engines? You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about how many hamburgers we eat? You think planet earth gives a rats rear end about cow farts? You think the planet cares about carbon credits? You think the planet cares about renewable energy? George Carlin nailed it when he said the planet will be fine. He nailed it even more when he proclaimed that the people are... lets clean it up... fouled up. Fouled up people sadly seem to predominate the discussion here. They think they can control things that they have no control over. That won't stop them from trying. they will spend as many trillions as it takes to chase their tail around in circles

My last point MD goes back to that bubbling little old Caldera over at Yellowstone. It will have a catastrophic eruption sooner rather than later. Can scientists figure out a way to stop a volcanic eruption that could destroy almost half of the USA? Do I want that to happen... hell no I don't. Do you think we can prevent it from happening? My point remains the same... planet earth will do what it wants, when it wants, where it wants and how it wants. These braniac scientists have about as much of a possibility of preventing a volcanic eruption as they do from saving the planet from global whatever they are calling it today. There is a boatload of money to be made by the right people being able to con enough other folks into believing the CC/GW con job. It has NEVER been about saving the freaking planet. It is about two very basic objectives... special interest groups using it to advance their beliefs and the realization that there is money to be made in advancing their objective.

Gonna have me a nice prime rib dinner tonight with a clear conscience that planet earth doen't care one way or another. Hell I am probably doing my part to save the planet... one less cow to fart...

Fascinating.
Not sure where you get the notion that I don't 'have faith', if that's what you mean by the 'latter' in Aquinas' words.

Perhaps you mean I don't have faith that the earth is some sort of sentient being, all powerful, capable of self-adjusting to whatever forces may act upon it, such that mankind shall continue to have an environment in which to thrive, or conversely to destroy mankind at it's sole will. Nope, I don't believe in that.

You are of course correct that there are natural forces way beyond man's current and likely future capacity to control. No argument there. In the very long run our sun is likely to explode, but the Earth will be a cinder long before then. But that's a very, very long run. Meanwhile...

But where the flat earth science denial comes in is the notion that mankind can have no significant impact upon the environment in which we live, including an impact upon climate. That seems simply preposterous to me on its face.

You call the scientists 'extremists', but this is the overwhelming consensus of those scientists who actually study this issue. Are they all 'extremists'???

But go ahead and stick your head in the sand, you won't be around when the bill for our errors comes due anyway.

To be sure, I too, would much prefer the notion that man has no responsibility for climate change, no responsibility to not destroy our planet. Simpler, no need to be concerned. But also cowardly.

Again, there's a legitimate discussion to be had about the tradeoffs between various policies and expenditures of resources to address the risks posed by climate change. What are the most effective policies, how to we adjust for new data, what are the costs of those choices? But we sure as heck better look to the 'brainiacs' in science to inform these discussions, not some flat earth faith in a self-adjusting planet!

About 12 years ago I had a discussion with a rabid FLP environmental guy who happened to be my boss at the time. It was he that informed me that planet earth was the perfect self correcting mechanism. In his opinion the earth needed to shed a few hundred million people to keep things under control. His argument was too many people were killing the planet and the planet would do what it had to do to find its proper balance. Where we disagree is that you think we can change what the planet will do. If you can explain to me how that process works and when we achieve it... I am all ears brother. Failing your inability to do so sort of proves my point. The best and brightest minds in science tell us they understand this thing 100% guaranteed. When you ask them to extrapolate this knowledge into the when, where and how they can't do it. How can you claim to understand something and at the very same time can't explain why they don't know what they understand is all about. Have you paid enough attention to read little catch phrases like... this could happen... the probability of this is very likely and in the worst case scenario. I would be much more worried about an eruption at Yellowstone before I would be worried about GW/CC. I will say it one more time... we should all be good stewards of our planet. When we think we can change what the planet will do... we have crossed in to territory that is beyond our control.

[cradleandshoot]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

For today, no it's not. But, to your point of sticking data, you should be upset with Sue Mauger/ Cookeeper uses ONE data point.


16 words, have to cull 6, to get to your usual snarky, 10 words or less, comments.

Sticking with single data point's is similar to crime rates and shootings...... ...12....

Using Single data points, usefullness, is equalevant to zero shootings and crime rates. 13

I think I am bashing you, by pointing out single data points and how it's just silly to rely on them. 21......but you get the point
And, I agree.....but how many good posters DO do precisely that, and YOU nevah call them out on it. hypocrite. at least three SINGLE DATA POINT comments/links were posted out of the last 15 or so........and not one 10 words or less sardonic comment from you....to them. Why is that?

I don’t know. I am not a conspiracy theorist and have just enough knowledge about science to pay attention. Doesn’t mean scientists are always right and it sure as hell doesn’t mean they are always wrong. Sometimes it is common sense used in conjunction with scientific findings. You are free to believe that man has no impact on “global warming” and the science around it is just wrong. We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile. Your sarcastic observation is something Roy Spencer has stated for quite awhile. Once all that co2 gas gets up in the atmosphere it is impossible to separate man made from naturally produced. The ASSUMPTION has been the increase has to be man made. That assumption continues to drive the discussion because there has been no real scientific study to actually determine where the increase is coming from. That is true science to the bone there. We don't know why it happens so it must be the simplest explanation possible... blame it on humans

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warm ... r-manmade/ Go ahead and hate him but these are his observations. Nobody has debunked them as far as I know

Find someone else besides Roy Spencer.
[/quote]

Read what he is saying and debunk it. I get it you dislike him but that does not mean what he is saying is incorrect. If you take 2 minutes and read it and you disagree... state your case where he is wrong. You prove your case and I will cheerfully join your side.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

For today, no it's not. But, to your point of sticking data, you should be upset with Sue Mauger/ Cookeeper uses ONE data point.


16 words, have to cull 6, to get to your usual snarky, 10 words or less, comments.

Sticking with single data point's is similar to crime rates and shootings...... ...12....

Using Single data points, usefullness, is equalevant to zero shootings and crime rates. 13

I think I am bashing you, by pointing out single data points and how it's just silly to rely on them. 21......but you get the point
And, I agree.....but how many good posters DO do precisely that, and YOU nevah call them out on it. hypocrite. at least three SINGLE DATA POINT comments/links were posted out of the last 15 or so........and not one 10 words or less sardonic comment from you....to them. Why is that?

I don’t know. I am not a conspiracy theorist and have just enough knowledge about science to pay attention. Doesn’t mean scientists are always right and it sure as hell doesn’t mean they are always wrong. Sometimes it is common sense used in conjunction with scientific findings. You are free to believe that man has no impact on “global warming” and the science around it is just wrong. We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile. Your sarcastic observation is something Roy Spencer has stated for quite awhile. Once all that co2 gas gets up in the atmosphere it is impossible to separate man made from naturally produced. The ASSUMPTION has been the increase has to be man made. That assumption continues to drive the discussion because there has been no real scientific study to actually determine where the increase is coming from. That is true science to the bone there. We don't know why it happens so it must be the simplest explanation possible... blame it on humans

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warm ... r-manmade/ Go ahead and hate him but these are his observations. Nobody has debunked them as far as I know

Find someone else besides Roy Spencer.

Read what he is saying and debunk it. I get it you dislike him but that does not mean what he is saying is incorrect. If you take 2 minutes and read it and you disagree... state your case where he is wrong. You prove your case and I will cheerfully join your side.
[/quote]

Take it easy.

[cradleandshoot]

Hot water is killing Alaskan salmon. Hottest July on record and it’s accelerating.

Do us all a favor, find the actual locations of all the data sites that are being used to make this claim. I've tried and tried on the NOAA website and can't find where they are located. Same with how many ships do the voluntary temp. reading while underway in the oceans. See you back with the information, like never. good luck

It’s all a big lie.

short and snarky in 10 words or less.....or just post a Utube video

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/alask ... index.html

The water temperatures have breaking records at the same time as the air temperatures, according to Sue Mauger, the science director for the Cook Inletkeeper.
Scientists have been tracking stream temperatures around the Cook Inlet, located south of Anchorage, since 2002. They've never recorded a temperature above 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Until now.
On July 7, a major salmon stream on the west side of the Cook Inlet registered 81.7 degrees.
Mauger said she and her team published a study in 2016, creating models outlining moderate and pessimistic projections for how climate change would drive temperatures in Alaska's streams.

No links in the article to the temp data locations, but aren't you all a little inquisative when NOAA posts water temps that are 25-30 degrees cooler than the 81.7 claim. I do remember the summer of 1784 being very hot. So was that hot spell of 1492. Climate data sets based on a few decades....awesomer.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/alaska.html

You can stick with one data point. Not many shootings today, the crime rate isn’t rising.

For today, no it's not. But, to your point of sticking data, you should be upset with Sue Mauger/ Cookeeper uses ONE data point.


16 words, have to cull 6, to get to your usual snarky, 10 words or less, comments.

Sticking with single data point's is similar to crime rates and shootings...... ...12....

Using Single data points, usefullness, is equalevant to zero shootings and crime rates. 13

I think I am bashing you, by pointing out single data points and how it's just silly to rely on them. 21......but you get the point
And, I agree.....but how many good posters DO do precisely that, and YOU nevah call them out on it. hypocrite. at least three SINGLE DATA POINT comments/links were posted out of the last 15 or so........and not one 10 words or less sardonic comment from you....to them. Why is that?

I don’t know. I am not a conspiracy theorist and have just enough knowledge about science to pay attention. Doesn’t mean scientists are always right and it sure as hell doesn’t mean they are always wrong. Sometimes it is common sense used in conjunction with scientific findings. You are free to believe that man has no impact on “global warming” and the science around it is just wrong. We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

We just don’t understand CO2 emissions. Too complicated.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile. Your sarcastic observation is something Roy Spencer has stated for quite awhile. Once all that co2 gas gets up in the atmosphere it is impossible to separate man made from naturally produced. The ASSUMPTION has been the increase has to be man made. That assumption continues to drive the discussion because there has been no real scientific study to actually determine where the increase is coming from. That is true science to the bone there. We don't know why it happens so it must be the simplest explanation possible... blame it on humans

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warm ... r-manmade/ Go ahead and hate him but these are his observations. Nobody has debunked them as far as I know

Find someone else besides Roy Spencer.

Read what he is saying and debunk it. I get it you dislike him but that does not mean what he is saying is incorrect. If you take 2 minutes and read it and you disagree... state your case where he is wrong. You prove your case and I will cheerfully join your side.

Take it easy.
[/quote]

sure thing TLD. If yer gonna toss flak up at the guy at least take the time to understand what he is saying. I don't expect you will agree with him but he has the credentials in the field to be taken seriously.