Backyard Aquaponics
http://backyardaquaponics.com/forum/

Global Warming
http://backyardaquaponics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=18997
Page 2 of 2

Author:  rsevs3 [ Oct 11th, '13, 10:43 ]
Post subject:  Re: Global Warming

earthbound wrote:
JM, please don't turn this into another one of those threads.... :geek:

Gees can everyone around here just chill. It seems that lately everyone wants to shout loudly and defensively about their beliefs, their businesses or their latest blog or informational product. With all this angst it makes reading through the forum not such a pleasant experience...


+1 EB

A couple of months absence and same select few are going off like bottle rockets. It is even pushing into other peoples AP threads.

This isnt how i remember the forum when i first signed up. It is a shame...

Author:  Charlie [ Oct 11th, '13, 11:16 ]
Post subject:  Re: Global Warming

Yep, absolute shame.

Author:  scotty435 [ Oct 11th, '13, 11:23 ]
Post subject:  Re: Global Warming

+1

Author:  Journeyman [ Oct 11th, '13, 12:20 ]
Post subject:  Re: Global Warming

I wasn't asked about, nor am I talking about pollution of other kinds. I am fully supportive of trying to reduce our footprint, clean up our act in many ways, and redistributing resources so everyone gets a decent life instead of the have-nots bankrolling our profligate lifestyles in the West.

The only benefits I see from our polluting lifestyles is to the hip pockets of the 0.1% and to our ever-expanding egos demanding the shiniest and biggest and latest from the programming we get daily to consume, consume, consume.

I am neither off topic nor even somehow demeaning the forums, but it is an interesting tactic to use to try to imply a thread labelled Global warming should not bring up AGW and the controversy surrounding the issues of Global warming. I am unsure why, for those so sensitive, it would seem a wise thing to do to come into the thread at all, let alone turn up just to make negative comments about the content rather than the subject.

But it has been a common tactic for the past 10 years as those who see the fallacies tried to bring the subject to notice.

Anyways...

AGW is a very specific dataset and attempts to roll it up with more emotive issues are simply repeating the various attempts to conceal the facts that the MSM and political types have been doing since they realised the planet is cooling.

I was asked about AGW and Climategate. My post is not strident but factual. There is no angst in there and I can back up every statement with names, dates and results, unlike the climatologists whose data comes from computer models and faked-up statistical analyses.

The cool region in the troposphere has still not been found.

The satellites and Argos data reports a cooling planet.

The oceans are giving up heat in increasing amounts, which is what is driving the increase in weather aberrations we are seeing.

Nils Axel Morner reports his seaside sites show no sea level increase within even 10% of what is claimed by Michael Mann and his cohorts sitting in their computer rooms - and Morner goes out and measures stuff.

The Medieval Warm Period did exist in spite of Mann, Jones and Briffa's attempts to deny it. The Earth has been warming not just in the past 50 years or so, but for the past 16,000 years - and the MWP was warmer than we are now. Kind of blows the whole AGW conclusions out of the water to have such a period in recent history, so it had to go.

re: Climategate. It can be tedious wading through 1000+ emails and headers etc. so there are a number of scientists who have analysed them and their impact. John Costella, a physicist from Melbourne is one such - his paper can be found at http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/greenhouse-science/climate-change/climategate-emails.pdf

There are plenty of others as well as attempts to devalue the impact of the content - e.g. those so doing like to call the release of emails etc. and illegal hacking action, but unfortunately, anyone familiar with servers can look at the headers of the documents and emails and KNOW this was done by a system admin or similar within the University. Nobody 'hacked' anything - someone with admin rights across at least 3 servers in the EAU domain gathered and released the info.

Author:  earthbound [ Oct 11th, '13, 12:22 ]
Post subject:  Re: Global Warming

Why don't you just ignore me JM........ :geek:

Author:  Journeyman [ Oct 11th, '13, 12:31 ]
Post subject:  Re: Global Warming

I didn't Joel, I responded in my own manner. Nobody is forced to come to this thread so why not just leave it to those who would like to discuss such things? Why is it people feel the need to come and be negative instead of, if they disagree, providing countering information or entering into a debate as to why what I say is wrong?

Mods and Admins should be working to reduce off topic comments rather than contributing them.

And it pertains to AP anyway - the climate issues affect the food cycles in use to feed people. As the food devalues in quality and increases in price I think we can expect more and more to turn to self-production and AP, as we have all experienced, tends to turn on the light in people as they realise what it might do.

Author:  earthbound [ Oct 11th, '13, 12:37 ]
Post subject:  Re: Global Warming

You just don't get it do you...? Go take a chill pill..

Author:  Journeyman [ Oct 11th, '13, 12:46 ]
Post subject:  Re: Global Warming

I don't actually need one. I am quite calm and rational. While my content might appear inflammatory to those with contrary opinions, it isn't. It is a straight presentation of factual data - as I said, I can back it up.

Perhaps you could point out where it might be wrong? Or maybe provide different views rather than point your posts at the poster rather than the subject?

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC + 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/