[One of Many]

One of many, If the pictured vehicle was using a diesel fuelled generator it could be classified as a diesel/gasoline hybrid and might actually be considered for exemption from the London low emission zone (if it were a commercial vehicle) or even the congestion charge! the applicant would need to prove certain parameters, but it would be no more insane than a hybrid SUV being exempt even though it is huge, weighs tons and puts out far more of just about every emission than a modern Diesel or Petrol(Gasolene) micro car would, not to mention that the conjestion charge was implemented to reduce conjestion, surely bigger car = more conjestion regardless of emissions?

And before i offend anyone here, i would like to point out that i love my old F250 and would never give it up willingly, but i'm not dumb enough to try and drive it through central London. All things are good in their place and my old "Effie" likes the agricultural zones, and hasn't done many miles in the last ten years, so is more of a driveway ornament anyway.

It has been expressed a number of times throughout this thread that an individual needs to know the history in order to comment, and i do agree. but i would like to affirm that i think, without fence sitting, everyone is right. and it is more the implementation that we all disagree with. We all have our differences and a lot of opinions are gained from watching polititions and greenies playing with technology that they just don't understand, It is like handing a mobile phone to a monkey sometimes!

I like the swamp/evaporative cooler example as it is just so typical, there is no way that it replaces traditional airconditioning practice, certainly not in humid areas, but a hard core greeny "Mr Sandles" might say that it does to "Mr Charisma" the Politician, the project is then put in the hands of "Mr Jobsworth" the accountant, and he decides that he can cut the budget by using the old ducting for a nice cheap retrofit solution and guess what, all of the "Key performance indicators" point to a job well done;
1, Protestors, quiet (or at least whining about something else).
2, Politician, re-elected as he has satisfied public opinion.
3, Accountant, chuffed as he has saved a fortune.

But all of a sudden folks start to get sick and die from Spores and Legionella and whatever else. but why blame the gun? it's the people that pulled the trigger isn't it?

My Utopia is a place where folks fit an evaporative cooler because it works in their environment, it saves them enough money to justify correct installation and that it be properly maintained. We all move on to designing a system that works in an area that the swamp cooler just won't work, surely it would be better to devote time to discussing the successes and promoting them relentlessly, If one doesn't believe in climate change he/she might believe in the saving of public funds, or just good old fashioned progress where a new idea lives or dies on the back of it's own merits.

And before I get cut down yes, it is over simplified, yes someone has already said it a couple of years ago and yes we could all benefit from reading more books.

Best Regards
Rick

Rick,

Thanks for being a reasonable voice in this wilderness.

Maybe it should be rephrased in that rehashing the old portions of this thread was not the intent. Learning the character traits, bad habits, and sure as Mariss pointed out.....the tiring rope-a-dope; tit-for-tat; offense/defense; ebbs and tides people in this thread have gone through. Some blow in then blow right back out, not up to verbal sparring to back up what they believe-they-think-they-know as fact from fiction repeated from their "trusted sources".

As I have stated before, this thread has been beneficial in showing there are more ways to think of the issue in many facets rather than getting stuck in one ideology. Although, I must admit that when it comes to the politically motivated pursuit of money and power grabs, I am totally against their efforts. Most of those elites pushing this have a lot to gain while using the environmental crutch no one should question. Pointing out flaws in the theory and speculation is demonized as careless with the majority of the factual exposing information contrary to that opinion silenced. Amazing that the hard truth can be subject to filtering from the insiders opposed to the agenda also based on scientific research. They can't alter the facts, but they can alter the message.

These supposed new ideas that do not stand on their own merits rarely indicate progress by funding them with coerced taxation and repressive regulation. I find this evident in that many of these so called green companies have been operating in the red for decades on subsidies. We are forced to pay for it's front end endless development, its production and whatever energy comes from it at a higher rate. Every government berates companies that do not operate with fiscal responsibility and even those that do as windfall profiteers. Yet they fund senseless projects and research with imaginary tax dollars so far in the red, it's beyond absurd……

DC

[jhowelb]

Poll: Economy outweighs environment

By JENNIFER ROBISON
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

Monday's National Clean Energy Summit 2.0 will bring a parade of celebrated public policy experts to Las Vegas to discuss greening the country's economy.

But as leaders including former President Bill Clinton, former Vice President Al Gore and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger encourage investments in alternative energy, their policy prescriptions could face serious headwinds from changing public opinions.

Recent surveys show Americans cooling to global warming, and they're even less keen on environmental policies they believe might raise power bills or imperil jobs. Those sentiments could mean a tougher road ahead for elected officials looking to fund investments in renewable power or install a carbon cap-and-trade system.

"Right now, Americans are more concerned about the economy than the environment," said Frank Newport, editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll. "The politician who says, 'I'm going to cripple jobs and shut down factories' would be in trouble in this economy."

[goshawk2]

It's polotiontics as usual.... Anyone want to control solar flares from the sun the very thing that controls 95% of our climate.....:wave:

[One of Many]

Before someone jumps in screaming "Off Topic", realize that if the below comes to fruition, these tactics will be used for installing egregious global warming laws plus any other agenda that the left wants to put forward. It will become illegal to think in the USA. What is sadly funny is that the same people that are upset about detaining true terrorists think nothing of using Nazi tactics on their own citizens who might disagree with them.... also a way to eliminate one's political opposition..

Snip============================================== ===================================

Just as I have pondered before. All the complaints and outrage over the signing and continuation of how the Patriot Act was some sinister egregious attempt to restrict civil liberties.....ends up being a sign of how the complainers would love to use the same law in a fascist manner many steps further, to their own political advantage once they had the pendulum of power swing in their direction.

Kinda makes "illegal wire tapping" of phone calls to terrorist nations seem so mundane, don't it?

Sure as he!!, the same tactics are being use on the AWG front! I certainly didn't vote for any of the senior congressional members or this administration that are directing such a hard line agenda.

Quite compelling when speaking truth to power a year ago was a right, transforms into potential acts of treason after the "Yes we can, change you can believe in" takes over. To heck with the open southern border and all.

Not a peep out of the MSM on the potential for a far left radical administration using a foreign terrorism tool against its own natural born citizens. Aptly named as they say. It's those opposition damd patriotic insiders that pose a threat to our retaining political power and can't be trusted!

DC

[dhayden]

[Climate models are part of this. Climate models are quite different from your expressed opinion.

The fact that models have difficulty in modelling ice-melt is because the mechanisms are still not properly understood. Currently the models underestimate melting by a factor of three or so. If it was merely a matter of a little tweaking here and there, then where would the problem be?

Model modification requires SCIENCE! This is why you are wrong!

Very briefly, climate models calculate the climate by incorporating the known behaviour of the various components of the atmosphere and hydrosphere. ]

When Science is settled, there is ONE model. NOT models. there are some 20 differing models of climate change, some of which disagree by a factor of 20 or more. This is not settled science.

a good book to read is CO2 and Climate change available from The Energy Advocate http://energyadvocate.com The newsletter, The Energy Advocate also puts some man caused climate change nonsense to rest.

[Rick Tiglon Eng]

Hello All,
Regarding the use of "scientific" models, i have a couple of opinions that i would like to share, these opinions have been formed as a result of many years working on, with and against scientific models, initially in the Steelmaking industry and later in my work on low emission goods vehicle technology, so for about twenty years now i have been deaing with the behaviour of models.

All scientific models are created to either prove/disprove a point or in order to make an assertion of some importance, this is as a result of the costs involved in building the model, models take time and are not cheap, as a result i have seen one of two things happen either; a. large investment or b. the cutting of corners.

Both A and B are not optimal as money is usually spent in order to make more money and this tends to influence the outcomes, and obviously the cutting of corners leads to assumptions and that is just not science.

Models are just a series of calculations where a number of factors are multiplied together, when there are as many factors involved as are required to predict the future of the world, it is really easy just to miss one little point here and there, the factors involved will invariably cancel each other out to some extent and the final factors that are derived from a good model will always show exactly what the modeller thought they would, if they dont, most modellers will generally assume an error and recalculate until they do, this is not always the case and sometimes a model that doesn't show the expected, becomes the focus of a "eureka moment" and these are the ones that we often see on the news.

The "problem" with models is the same as the "problem" with digital meters of any kind and that is they are very definative even though the inputs are often analogue the outputs are digital and we have come to depend on all things digital and respect them to the letter, but they are often only as good as the analogue source data.

So where does this leave "us" the folks that want to know the answers. I say it leaves us in a pretty good position, as we have a lot of data to look at and some of this is now getting older, take a five year old report, look at what it says would be the case in five years, compare that to what you see when you look around and you will have an answer, then take the rest of the report as seriously or otherwise as you should so choose.

Once again i know this is over simplified, but it is meant to be in order to get one point across, the data Has been out there for a while and we should be seeing some of the effects by now, so are we? taking into account tipping points and exponential growths, may not have been reached. There is "data" out there that said we would be ankle deep in water by now and other data that said nothing was going to happen, and both of these assertions were wrong, as there have been changes but we don't need snorkels in New York, London or Sydney as yet.

The tipping point theories are valid as theories, and I have seen thermodynamic tipping point experiments with my own eyes that are very convincing not specifically related to the environment, but they did give me a greater appreciation for the idea. Inertia is huge in this case though and if there is one thing the earth has on it's side, it is this inertia.

Best Regards
Rick

[dufas]

All scientific models are created to either prove/disprove a point or in order to make an assertion of some importance, this is as a result of the costs involved in building the model, models take time and are not cheap, as a result i have seen one of two things happen either; a. large investment or b. the cutting of corners.

Having worked with environmental scientists, I have personally observed them changing the tests again and again in order for the outcome to fit their theories. In other words, they lied to the public. You are correct about the money only it was their grant money that was coming to them that was most important....

[One of Many]

While this may be more of a blue collar opinion, I sense it valid from my readings on climate models. I doubt there will ever be a tipping point that anyone can put their finger on. That is the holy grail fear mongering they are working to avoid without so little justification other than the power and authority to do so.

There are never enough direct variables, let alone indirect variables that purely influence primary drivers amongst peripheral unknowns in realistic ratios anyone can nail down as foregone prediction. If the models were left open source so others can look at the knee jerk reaction data and how it is being manipulated, the broader scientific community could have input. That seems to be one of the bigger glitches in making unsubstantiated claims. Not many are willing to let their research, data and methods be put under a microscope.

I view the results of climate models no more reliable than predicting the fallout of sand in a heated mixture of several fluids of differing viscosity. It may be known how each acts on its own, but not how they react together, or at different temperatures or methods of agitation. The only conclusions that can be claimed are generalities for specific man made inputs that are in a controlled environment. Throw uncontrolled nature into the mix and all generalities would lean toward the inconclusive. Which in my reading is exactly what many Scientists say about the current models. The ones that tout them are the ones that design them, although will not disclose their flaws. That is a vested conflict of interest if the software cannot stand on its own merits that politician lean on, against the fraternal insider critics that point out their unreliable output.

Instead it becomes a game of selling policy with propaganda, discounting the critics and adjusting the message to suit the agenda.

DC

[dufas]

While this may be more of a blue collar opinion, I sense it valid from my readings on climate models. I doubt there will ever be a tipping point that anyone can put their finger on. That is the holy grail fear mongering they are working to avoid without so little justification other than the power and authority to do so.
DC

The following is related only to the ethics and the politics of scientific data.

During the late 50s there was a movement [by liberals] to stop the modification of automobiles, especially the engines, by private parties. The government approached various scientists and universities to devise data to this end.

The 'scientific' results were that 280 horse power was the maximum that could be extracted from a passenger car's engine. Terminal speed through the quarter mile is 135 miles per hour. [remember, this was the late 50s]

The politicians kept pushing these figures until a guy by the name of Gartlits went over 180 MPH in the quarter mile. The scientists went back to their slide rules and came up with new figures, proclaiming that the Gartlits' vehicle had gone as fast as any vehicle could go without attaching the vehicle to the ground like a roller coaster car and drive a pinion gear against a rack for the full length of the track. Not long after that last scientific proclamation, a full bodied Ford Mustang went 230 MPH and the scientific and political community went silent. Today, vehicles have gone past 300 MPH and engines are pumping out over 8000 HP.

The point being that scientists will manipulate data to fit a political agenda if they can get the grant money to do so. No matter the subject,it has happened before, it is happening now, and it will surely happen in the future..

[One of Many]

Hey Duf,

The concept there is that one side is working with hypothetical theory and the other with the tangible mechanisms.

Which still seems a bit silly handing politicians gobs of money to avoid a hypothesis by using improbable theory. The net effect isn't as important as the income and supped up control it generates. That upper hand setup lets them win either way!

Hence the problem with our nation as a republic. If an elected official representing San Francisco is pushing federal laws the rest of the nation doesn't agree to, but has to live with. I'd prefer that I would have a vote to prevent their radical agenda on anyone but their local constituents, whom have more choice in throwing their ass out of office.

DC

[dhayden]

More and more REAL scientists are gaining the courage to stand up against the silly global warming / climate change political scientists.

For example just yesterday, 100 sicentists signed an open letter to the American Physical Society that they change their statement on Climate change to include the following:

Greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, accompany human industrial and agricultural activity. While substantial concern has been expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th 21st century changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today. In addition, there is an extensive scientific literature that examines beneficial effects of increased levels of carbon dioxide for both plants and animals.

Studies of a variety of natural processes, including ocean cycles and solar variability, indicate that they can account for variations in the Earth’s climate on the time scale of decades and centuries. Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate.

The APS supports an objective scientific effort to understand the effects of all processes – natural and human --on the Earth’s climate and the biosphere’s response to climate change, and promotes technological options for meeting challenges of future climate changes, regardless of cause.

Click Here for the complete letter to the Council of the American Physical Society.

[fizzissist]

dhayden,
Thank you for that post. Either my friends in the APS missed that, or they didn't tell me..unforgiveable either way...

One of the signators is discussed in this blog:
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6774

I'm posting that so people who want to jump on the "they're schills of Big Oil" wagon can see that no, these people are actual scientists, dealing with the real deal. They can see for themselve that there IS discussion, and the science is NOT settled.

My info on AGU meetings is that the split on AGW is about in thirds...1/3 believe it, 1/3 don't, and 1/3 are undecided or on the fence. Like the APS, the AGU is comprised of genuine scientists.

....btw, dufas, your post on the integrity of scientific research wasn't lost on me. I can tell you first hand stories of "dry labbing", or massaging the data.

Funny, isn't it...If you don't tell the funding agency what they want to hear, you run the risk of no more funding. And who are the leading funding agencies?

....HINT....they AIN'T big oil.

[handlewanker]

I hear Al Gore made 100 million outta the Global Warming game!

The moral of that scenario is to be in the right place at the right time with the right goods, like any good salesman will tell you, any other time place or thing is yesterday's stale bread.

No matter what yo'all think of ol' Al, he has impecable timing.

At the end of all this AGW hubbub, some of yo'all jus' gonna walk away rich, while others are wishing they were richer, but those that didn't get rich at all and realising they bin' barking up the proverbial wrong tree all the time, and with that experience they just get wiser and look for trees that get the right bark response.

The whole problem is based upon public acclaim, that is the shower of glory that accompanies an obscure claim that gets the public eye and takes a long time to wither away.

At this moment in time it is more important to get in there, get the bread crumbs, and get out without getting your tail feathers pecked, at least that is what the birds on my back patio will tell you, each morning when I throw the seed and bread crumbs out for them to fight over.

The whole business of Global Warming, if it were known as to how much is actually being spent on models, surveys, data collection/correlation, and public awareness campaigns, if spent otherwise, would make the problem of funding a national health service absolutely free to everyone who needed it, but that wouldn't make the likes of Al Gore and co or the health insurance companies rich would it.

It never ceases to amaze me as to how much money can be diverted to frivoulous topics without achieving anything significant.

The great Global Warming marathon is being run, and there are a lot of runners already getting their rewards long before the end of the race, and there are many more runners still to come in.

It's not about oil, or coal, or CO2, or pollution or at the very furthest point of view about rising sea levels, it's about money, pure and simple, money, and how to get it.

That bit about the internment camps for "re-educating" some sectors of the population make sense, seeing as how when the troops pull out of the Middle East, the military wouldn't want them to just go home and disappear like, too many unemployed highly trained people with "people handling Skills" just wandering the streets with nothing to do, so they just get them to man the "public thinking adjustment centres" at the public expense of course, a sort of holding pen for weapons of mass destruction in case they are needed.
Ian.

[fizzissist]

It is with great arrogance that fizz wizz et al, tells us that from his source of info the world is saved from a watery grave and not to worry as it's all a political ploy to get funds for further research into more interesting ideas yet to be tabulated, but not yet on the agenda, a meeting will have to be convened to discuss this so that the world body of learned souls can get together and be in total but harmonius disagreement, which will need carefull study to refute any ideas that might conflict with the current trend of thinking.

Am I to believe that the waters are not going to rise, instead the land is sinking?

Well unless the land is a sponge it's going to displace a whole lot of water, but that's just an urban myth, same as the fact that there is a whole lot more ice being dumped into the sea up north, and I wonder what caused that to melt, no need to worry, by the time it's significent, we'll all be playing musical instruments on a cloud, well some of us, not those that tell lies and call it the science of enlightenment, St Pete doesn't like story tellers.

Backpeddle, backpeddle.

Ian, you are such a bore.

[fizzissist]

More wisdom of handlewanker:

#4388 "So Mr Wild, the Greenland ice cap is insignificent you think? don't worry about it then until the water is making the New Yorkers a bit nervous about their real estate."

#4381" If their endeavours are unsuccesfull in proving that the humanoids can control their environment, it is estimated at the current greenland glacier ice melt rate, that the ocean levels could, (most probably will), rise by 23 metres in the very near future."

...There's a whole lot more. Anyone care for more evidence of his vasilating, ignorant ponification?

[fizzissist]

To state the case plainly, I believe that Al Gore is correct in promoting the hypothesis of the eminent drastic climate change that is indicated by accumulated data, collected and researched by various scientists around the world.

The fact that he's made a lot of money at it proves that there are supporters for the hypothesis as well, that put their money where their mouths are and also awarded him with that most prestigious prize, no one forced them to become an audience at the stage shows.
Ian.

Showering Glory Upon The AlGoreical...

The whole problem is based upon public acclaim, that is the shower of glory that accompanies an obscure claim that gets the public eye and takes a long time to wither away.Ian.

Stating that the problem is because of those who ....shower glory...people like him.

[fizzissist]

...the headline...
Study Finds Big Storms on a 1,000-Year Rise

The North Atlantic Ocean has spawned more hurricanes and tropical storms over the last decade than it has since a similarly stormy period 1,000 years ago, according to a new study.

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/08...ise-94323.html


...the science...

The Mann et al. historical predictions range from a minimum of 9 to a maximum of 14 storms in any given year (rounding to nearest integer), with an average of 11.6 storms and a standard deviation of 1.0 storms (!). The Landsea observational record has a minimum of 4 storms and a maximum of 28 with and average of 11. 7 and a standard deviation of 3.75. I suspected that a random number generator for hurricane counts since 1870 would result in the same bottom-line results and when I appended a series of random numbers constrained between 9 and 14 from 1870-2006 to the "predicted" values, lo and behold --- 20th century values exceed every other point except about 1,000 years ago.

http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/se...max-results=50

Oh. Michael Mann. Shoulda known.

[handlewanker]

Yes Fizzwizz, it's hard to know what to believe in these days, that is ever since man gave up the original "scientific process" of rummaging in the bowels of a sheep to find out what lay around the corner.

Now we have to rely on the even more dubious quotes of scientists that value their pay packets more than their scientific findings, and are just as willing as the soothsayers of old to please anyone that funds their way of life.

Anyway, I have already stated a few posts back that I tend to agree that Al Gore is a candidate for the long nose syndrome, (see the Life and trials of Pinoccio), but that doesn't make him despicable or despisable or a dastardly beastly blaggard, not a man who qualified for the Nobel Peace Prize, he was only doing what for Humanoids comes naturally, that is selling their souls for whatever it's worth, and in the process I also tend to detect a trace of the greenest jealousy from yo'all, even though he was one of your boys and a Yank to boot.

Anyone who can crank the system up to hyper drive and legally generate 100 million gob smacking razoos has my vote as the most succesfull entrepreneurial sharp minded forward looking Humanoid since PT Barnum said, "there's one born every minute".

If Barnum was right, all yo' troubles are over, seeing as how at 100 million dollars a minute is going to make a lot of rich Yanks to boost yo' economy, don't wait, the world is ripe for the plucking, remember timing is of the utmost importance, and Al has got impecable timing.

It would seem that the World tends to get conveniently very ethical at the wrong moment, forgetting that most wars were fought for gain, pure and simple, and that is about as ethical as fighting for peace.....LOL.
Ian.

[One of Many]

Ian,

I may have finally found the source of your knowledge base…

Keep it handy when the waters rise, so no one here misses another ounce of your vast wisdom on sheep bowels!

DC

[maz43]

Ian,

I may have finally found the source of your knowledge base…

Keep it handy when the waters rise, so no one here misses another ounce of your vast wisdom on sheep bowels!

ROFL!
This thread is like a bottle of wine- I keeps getting better with age.
I wonder what the carbon footprint of that contraption would be.......