• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Powerful Ad

IndepCentristMA said:
Right... ignore the facts... and go on your anectodal observation... :roll:

watchout the sky must also be falling...

BTW the "technical gibberish" (the facts from actual compiled data), say that there has been 1 category 3 hurricane to hit FL since 1995... Just 1... Hurricane Charley in 2004... so please, go on with your rant... without facts to back it up...

500 years of hurricane history - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com

Also... since you've been there for 45 years... you say...

There have been just 4 major hurricanes to hit FL since you've been there...

(7 yrs) - 1975 - (15yrs) - 1992 - (3yrs) - 1995 - (9yrs) - 2004 (8yrs) to present...

that's an average 8.4 yrs between major storms of a category 3 hurricane or higher ever ... and it's been 8 since the last...

things aren't getting worse... they're right on track...

same as with NYC... Miami is the most likely place for a major hurricane to hit... it's on the longest drought of any to get hit with a major storm... NYC was 2nd on that list...

so don't go making this same bogus claim when Miami gets hit in the next 2-3 yrs with a hurricane... that's just what's supposed to happen...

fl_landfalls.gif

us_landfalls.gif


"Wise men say, only fools rush in..."

but I can't help claiming global warming is the cause of the lack of storms of a severe nature?

sorry bud, FACTS don't back it up...

time to get a grip...
Click to expand...

You don't have to have a direct hit by a hurricane to be severely impacted by it. I was here, without power and repaired the home damage and fallen trees. It's not I who doesn't know.

I direct you to these sources for info on data..
2004 Atlantic hurricane season - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2005 Atlantic hurricane season - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pardon moi if I believe my lying eyes.
 
Excon said:
Can you show that for the most part, this isn't a result of more accurate monitoring systems.
Click to expand...

Can you show this is a result of more accurate monitoring systems?
 
Arbo said:
Ah, a cherry picker I see. At least I know you don't have any opinions of your own.
Click to expand...

A cherry picker??? Dude you said it was an ordinary event, it was not. You were trying to pretend as though this storm was nothing unusual and that all the guff from the left is a bunch of hot air, it is not. You got caught saying something that is extraordinarily wrong.
 
IndepCentristMA said:
I'm not a climate change denier... I'm a fan of actual facts... and the facts do not prove climate change exists...

Many intelligent people have spent their lives researching this, and come up with conclusions that lean each way on the issue... you chose to side with one conclusion... I stay away from people's conclusions and make my own based off the relevant data... and the data doesn't prove anything...

I myself, as someone with a 142 IQ and has taken multiple environmental science courses at Harvard think, well, hey... you know what... I am just one of those people you're referring to... as the intelligent people who have spent time researching this... I have to say, from all of the studies I have seen, the ones that suggest climate change is a fact are based on personal opinions, but the ones based on empiric data suggest there hasn't been a clear and exponentially increasing change coinciding with industrialization... It's just not there...

The weather patterns today are the same as weather patterns have been as far back as recorded memory goes...

I didn't suggest the bible quote was right because it was written by god... I suggested its an age old tested fable...

If you build in the sand it gets washed away, if you build on the rock it has firm ground to stand on... its as simple as that...

Humans consistently build delicate structures closer to the water... fill in land made of silt along the water's edge... and then cry foul when a storm surge comes in and wipes them out...

That's not a sign of anything other than human encroachment into nature, and nature winning the battle...

The weather of this recent storm matches nearly identical with The Perfect Storm of 1991... 20 years ago...

That's called cyclical weather... not increasing... you can't name a storm between then and now which fit that same pattern... 20 years apart...

Again... the NYC area faces a category 3 storm once every 75 years statistically... it's been 74... and this storm was only a category 1... so nothing indicates that the pattern is decreasing in length...

NYC_hurricanes_fig2.JPG


That's called data... the data... does not show a pattern of increasing storms...

In fact... the data... shows that there were 7 hurricanes which hit the NYC area between 1850 and 1908 (58yrs), the year the Model T Ford hit production lines... since 1908 the data showed 7 hurricanes hit NYC, we have now had an 8th in the 104 years... so please, show me how the increase in automobiles producing greenhouse gas emisions has lead to increasingly intensive weather pattern....

Again... you cannot be taken seriously by pointing to a cloud and going look there's global warming... Show me the proof.... this hurricane is not proof... it's a solitary data point on a chart which has had NUMEROUS category 1 hurricanes in October... over the last 200+ years... without any sign of increase since industrialization has increased...
Click to expand...

Lol you are so completely full of ****. "I have an IQ of 142", "I've gone to Harvard", "Climate change isn't real", you just make stuff up as it suits you.
 
Verax said:
Dude you said it was an ordinary event, it was not.
Click to expand...

It's ok, you can admit you are ignoring all the actual scientific data put forth by ICMA, you wouldn't be the only one...

Oh wait, I see below this post I am responding to you already have made it clear you are ignoring his data, this time by trying to shift things to personal insults. Got it.
 
Arbo said:
It's ok, you can admit you are ignoring all the actual scientific data put forth by ICMA, you wouldn't be the only one...

Oh wait, I see below this post I am responding to you already have made it clear you are ignoring his data, this time by trying to shift things to personal insults. Got it.
Click to expand...

LoL, I'm not going to waste my afternoon arguing with somebody that "gravity doesn't exist" either. Saying things like "scientific data says climate change is not conclusive, the data does not support it" is insulting, that is NOT what they say at all. The scientific community is very, very strongly in support of climate change. Pretending otherwise is just utter bull****. If you want to say the scientific community as a whole is wrong then by all means do that, but do not pretend that they do not support climate change.
 
grip said:
You don't have to have a direct hit by a hurricane to be severely impacted by it. I was here, without power and repaired the home damage and fallen trees. It's not I who doesn't know.

I direct you to these sources for info on data..
2004 Atlantic hurricane season - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2005 Atlantic hurricane season - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pardon moi if I believe my lying eyes.
Click to expand...

LMFAO... btw... 2004 was the major storm they mentioned... and it's been 8 years since then... 8.5 years is the pattern of major storms coming through...

Oh no... you had to repair damage from fallen trees?

LMFAO... we have to do that regularly here in MA from normal storms at all times of the year... I hope this isn't recent news in your 45 years that tree limbs come down in storms...

That does nothing to change the fact that over time there is not an increasing pattern of storms...

So you mentioned anecdotal patterns of 2004 and 2005... let's see how they compare with the rest of the 2000s...


Year -- # depressions – # Storms – # Hurricanes – # Major Hurricanes
2000 – 19—15 – 8 – 3
2001 – 17 – 15 – 9 – 4
2002 – 14 – 12 – 4 – 2
2003 – 21 – 16 – 7 – 3
2004 – 16 – 15 – 9 – 6
2005 – 31 – 28 – 15 – 7
2006 – 10 – 10 – 5 – 2
2007 – 17 – 15 – 6 – 2
2008 – 17 – 16 – 8 – 5
2009 – 11 – 9 – 3 – 2
2010 – 21 – 19 – 12 – 5
2011—20 – 19 – 7 – 4
2012 – 19 – 19 – 10 – 1


OMFG… what a sign of the apocalypse… the number and the amount of storms is increasing exponentially, and they’re increasing in their severity… :roll:

Actually, what that data shows, is that the high totals were all from 1 outlier year of activity… in 2005… but, all the lows from those periods have actually been closer to the current date… The severity has been at its lowest in the most recent year… with just 1 storm having reached Category 3 status… which it held for just 12 hrs off the coast of Cape Verde, and never had any effect on anything…

fl_landfalls.gif
us_landfalls.gif


So, what your “lying eyes” showed you, was that your first experiences in FL were in a deep lull decade of the 1970s… then there was recently a hyper-active year in 2005… but that overall… the hurricane activity is really around normal… maybe slightly higher than normal, but not out of the ordinary…

Atlantic_hurricane_historical.gif


You… maybe you’re right, though… maybe people stopped driving cars in the 1970s and 1980s… then once the 1990s began they started driving cars all over again to make the storms go back to normal rates…

Or… there could be natural cycles in weather patterns..

World Climate Report » Cycles in Landfalling U.S. Hurricanes?
keim_fig2.JPG


Nah… it’s all man-made climate change… right? We just decided the worst years we would make storms would be 1893, 1950, and 2005… about 55 years apart from each other… conveniently…
 
Verax said:
Lol you are so completely full of ****. "I have an IQ of 142", "I've gone to Harvard", "Climate change isn't real", you just make stuff up as it suits you.
Click to expand...

Well... isn't that what you just did?

I never said "Climate change isn't real"... show me that quote...

I said facts do not prove climate change exists...

As far as the other two, I said em, and they're both 100% accurate...

The other thing I said is that the data does not show an exponential increase frequency or severity of hurricanes which matches in correlation the increase of industrialization, as would need be to indicate climate change is the result of man-made assault on the environment... and That the pattern of deaths has gone down because of notification of the storms, and the increased damage costs have more to do with people encroaching on otherwise unsustainable land...

That's also accurate and the data backs that up...

So back to your misleading misrepresentation of facts... and baseless insults...


Psst... Someone ought to have told these colonial era storms they shouldn't exist, because people weren't driving cars yet...

Hurricane timeline: 1495 to 1800 - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
 
One of the most pathetic, distasteful, disgusting ad's I've ever seen this election cycle. What a pathetic raping of this tragedy for political gain.

The Republicans would be getting a gift if this was turned into an actual ran ad that played a ton between now and election day. Outside of a few people who are hugely invested into the global warming issue, the majority of normal every day people that will view this will see nothing but cheap, disgusting, low ball political theater or trying to capitalize on a non-politics related tragedy for political gain on the backs of all those dead and in desperate times due to this storm.

Disgusting.
 
IndepCentristMA said:
LMFAO... btw... 2004 was the major storm they mentioned... and it's been 8 years since then... 8.5 years is the pattern of major storms coming through...

Oh no... you had to repair damage from fallen trees?

LMFAO... we have to do that regularly here in MA from normal storms at all times of the year... I hope this isn't recent news in your 45 years that tree limbs come down in storms...

That does nothing to change the fact that over time there is not an increasing pattern of storms...

So you mentioned anecdotal patterns of 2004 and 2005... let's see how they compare with the rest of the 2000s...


Year -- # depressions – # Storms – # Hurricanes – # Major Hurricanes
2000 – 19—15 – 8 – 3
2001 – 17 – 15 – 9 – 4
2002 – 14 – 12 – 4 – 2
2003 – 21 – 16 – 7 – 3
2004 – 16 – 15 – 9 – 6
2005 – 31 – 28 – 15 – 7
2006 – 10 – 10 – 5 – 2
2007 – 17 – 15 – 6 – 2
2008 – 17 – 16 – 8 – 5
2009 – 11 – 9 – 3 – 2
2010 – 21 – 19 – 12 – 5
2011—20 – 19 – 7 – 4
2012 – 19 – 19 – 10 – 1


OMFG… what a sign of the apocalypse… the number and the amount of storms is increasing exponentially, and they’re increasing in their severity… :roll:

Actually, what that data shows, is that the high totals were all from 1 outlier year of activity… in 2005… but, all the lows from those periods have actually been closer to the current date… The severity has been at its lowest in the most recent year… with just 1 storm having reached Category 3 status… which it held for just 12 hrs off the coast of Cape Verde, and never had any effect on anything…

fl_landfalls.gif
us_landfalls.gif


So, what your “lying eyes” showed you, was that your first experiences in FL were in a deep lull decade of the 1970s… then there was recently a hyper-active year in 2005… but that overall… the hurricane activity is really around normal… maybe slightly higher than normal, but not out of the ordinary…

Atlantic_hurricane_historical.gif


You… maybe you’re right, though… maybe people stopped driving cars in the 1970s and 1980s… then once the 1990s began they started driving cars all over again to make the storms go back to normal rates…

Or… there could be natural cycles in weather patterns..

World Climate Report » Cycles in Landfalling U.S. Hurricanes?
keim_fig2.JPG


Nah… it’s all man-made climate change… right? We just decided the worst years we would make storms would be 1893, 1950, and 2005… about 55 years apart from each other… conveniently…
Click to expand...

You sit there in MA with your stats trying to tell me what I went thru. You try and diminish the terror of the events I experienced that you have apparently no firsthand knowledge of as though somehow information can replace reality. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? You didn't see a 3ft wide, fifty foot high oak tree whip side to side, top to ground like a piece of grass. You didn't see the front of my house, a 13 ft wall buckle under 140mph winds with me right in front of it. You didn't see your whole neighborhood blown apart with debris, strewn from one end to the other. And you didn't hear the wind howl like a runaway freight train, hour after hour and time after time, flipping cars, ripping down limbs, shingles, branches, live power lines, trees, roofs, pool screens and anything else not tied down. You didn't see us sweating for days with no air in 90 degree temps, conserving fresh water and food. You didn't watch your father suffer with mental delusions from not getting his dialysis because of no power.

Go thru what I have and then tell me it's all normal. Spend a month with your whole state burning up from wildfires making the air outdoors literally unbreathable. Have the fire department run you out of your home to a dirty overpriced motel room at the beach afraid, not only your house would burn but that you might have to jump in the ocean. You have no idea what you're talking about. But please pretend to KNOW and tell me what I should believe.
 
grip said:
If you bother to read any of my other posts in this thread you'll see that's exactly what I said, NOT!

I said to reduce both and give POWER to the people, man.
Click to expand...


Oh, like ancient Greece?
 
IndepCentristMA said:
Well... isn't that what you just did?

I never said "Climate change isn't real"... show me that quote...

I said facts do not prove climate change exists...

As far as the other two, I said em, and they're both 100% accurate...

The other thing I said is that the data does not show an exponential increase frequency or severity of hurricanes which matches in correlation the increase of industrialization, as would need be to indicate climate change is the result of man-made assault on the environment... and That the pattern of deaths has gone down because of notification of the storms, and the increased damage costs have more to do with people encroaching on otherwise unsustainable land...

That's also accurate and the data backs that up...

So back to your misleading misrepresentation of facts... and baseless insults...


Psst... Someone ought to have told these colonial era storms they shouldn't exist, because people weren't driving cars yet...

Hurricane timeline: 1495 to 1800 - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
Click to expand...

You just want to dance around and play games, semantics, split hairs, change the subject. You're railing against climate change nonetheless so what does it matter if you exactly said that? You've said it in so many words. "Facts do not prove climate change exists"...? Wtf is that supposed to mean? You trying to be clever or something and dance around?

I don't care what you say you are, people can say they are superman on this forum, means nothing. So now you're saying that climate change exists but is not man made. This is just another faucet of climate change denial, so you are still in that group no matter how hard to try to weasel out of it.

Pointing towards a couple aspects of climate change, a few data points and then trying to make an argument against this or that is silly. You take millions of data points, the entire argument, you look through the whole thing, all the data. That is the foundation that climate change science rests on in its entirety. You don't just point out a couple things and draw conclusions on outliers as being the gold standard.
 
Zyphlin said:
One of the most pathetic, distasteful, disgusting ad's I've ever seen this election cycle. What a pathetic raping of this tragedy for political gain.

The Republicans would be getting a gift if this was turned into an actual ran ad that played a ton between now and election day. Outside of a few people who are hugely invested into the global warming issue, the majority of normal every day people that will view this will see nothing but cheap, disgusting, low ball political theater or trying to capitalize on a non-politics related tragedy for political gain on the backs of all those dead and in desperate times due to this storm.

Disgusting.
Click to expand...

That's what Republicans get for taking an anti-science position. They deny climate change because it impacts the fossil fuel industry, now THAT is disgusting. They put profit ahead of the well being of the people.
 
baby-crying.jpg


The following rant was brought to you by the letter O...

grip said:
You sit there in MA with your stats trying to tell me what I went thru. You try and diminish the terror of the events I experienced that you have apparently no firsthand knowledge of as though somehow information can replace reality. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? You didn't see a 3ft wide, fifty foot high oak tree whip side to side, top to ground like a piece of grass. You didn't see the front of my house, a 13 ft wall buckle under 140mph winds with me right in front of it. You didn't see your whole neighborhood blown apart with debris, strewn from one end to the other. And you didn't hear the wind howl like a runaway freight train, hour after hour and time after time, flipping cars, ripping down limbs, shingles, branches, live power lines, trees, roofs, pool screens and anything else not tied down. You didn't see us sweating for days with no air in 90 degree temps, conserving fresh water and food. You didn't watch your father suffer with mental delusions from not getting his dialysis because of no power.

Go thru what I have and then tell me it's all normal. Spend a month with your whole state burning up from wildfires making the air outdoors literally unbreathable. Have the fire department run you out of your home to a dirty overpriced motel room at the beach afraid, not only your house would burn but that you might have to jump in the ocean. You have no idea what you're talking about. But please pretend to KNOW and tell me what I should believe.
Click to expand...

Worlds+Smallest+Violin.jpg


I feel for you man... really, I do...

Then again... you have no idea what I've been through, and jump to your victim conclusions...

In the past few years, we here in MA have seen tornadoes, forest fires, earthquakes, hurricanes, nor’easters, ice storms, flooding, red tide, and just about any natural disaster you could name except volcanic eruption... But then again... that's not out of the ordinary either... As that has happened throughout time as well...

2/3rds of the town I grew up in burnt up in a huge forest fire...

The window in my kitchen doesn't close because a tree fell into it while I was in it...

When we get 100 winds from Nor’easters that last for 3 days, and are left without power with 3 feet of snow on the ground... it's not 90 degrees outside, it's sub 30, and you have to chop and burn wood that's frozen stiff to get water boiled in order to cook, bath, and stop from freezing to death (which many actually suffer from)…

No, I didn't watch your father suffering from mental delusions because his dialysis machine didn't have power... Instead I watched my mother have mental delusions and gasp for air as her fragile disease ridden body died when I was a teen... so spare me your bogus sob stories... you've still got your parents in your adult age... and I’m not here ignoring statistics and trying to claim cancer is the #1 killer in the US, that’s clearly heart disease…

I understand you have gotten swept up by your own imagination, to make it seem what you saw was so extraordinary that no one else has experienced it... but that doesn't fit the pattern... a one time suffering from a hurricane is not a unique experience... it's shared by numerous people in numerous parts of the world and has been for centuries...

Those aren't meaningless statistics... they are statistics which keep track of the frequency and severity of these natural disasters... yes, they are disasters... and they are an unfortunate and threatening part of nature... but that's nothing new... it's been this way since the beginning of time... and that's the reality of it...

Still, the statistics can not be doctored, they can not be forged... they are set in stone... and they can be tracked and measured...

What I’ve provided is a complete listing of those statistics… and while they show fluctuations over time, they do not show an increasing pattern of frequency and severity coinciding with industrialization…
 
Verax said:
You just want to dance around and play games, semantics, split hairs, change the subject. You're railing against climate change nonetheless so what does it matter if you exactly said that? You've said it in so many words. "Facts do not prove climate change exists"...? Wtf is that supposed to mean? You trying to be clever or something and dance around?

I don't care what you say you are, people can say they are superman on this forum, means nothing. So now you're saying that climate change exists but is not man made. This is just another faucet of climate change denial, so you are still in that group no matter how hard to try to weasel out of it.

Pointing towards a couple aspects of climate change, a few data points and then trying to make an argument against this or that is silly. You take millions of data points, the entire argument, you look through the whole thing, all the data. That is the foundation that climate change science rests on in its entirety. You don't just point out a couple things and draw conclusions on outliers as being the gold standard.
Click to expand...

That's absolutely hilarious... you're the ones trying to make the claim that hurricane Sandy proves the existence of climate change...

That would be the 1 data point... that isn't out of the ordinary... it's not even an outlier... It's what was expected to happen...

They predicted the course of this hurricane while it was off the coast of Jamaica still a tropical storm at that point... not some stunning storm that was unpredictable... everyone was aware of this...

Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog : Hurricane Sandy pounding Jamaica, may hit U.S. this weekend; TS Tony forms | Weather Underground

Notice how many other times this had occured, from a tropical storm in that path... and how many models had it hiting the Mid-Atlantic/New England...

oct24_gfsend.gif



I'm sorry you have difficulty understanding what I said, and can't understand the intricacies...

What I said is that I'm a fan of data... and data does not prove that there is a man-made climate change... There simply is not and has not been a steady increase in anything in correlation to man’s technological advances or rise in population. There is not a rise in the frequency or severity of weather patterns… All the attempts to make that case are not backed up by the data… The only fluctuations tend to coincide with increased seismic activity…

That is science… I’m not against science… and I’m certainly no bible thumper…

When you have to admit eventually that global climate change is an unproven theory, and not a scientific fact, then we can continue this discussion… as to the merits of the theory, but instead, you’re unscientifically jumping the gun and making knee-jerk decisions… That’s not scientific that’s the same type of go with your gut decision making that is what made GWB such an awful leader…
 
IndepCentristMA said:
That's absolutely hilarious... you're the ones trying to make the claim that hurricane Sandy proves the existence of climate change...

That would be the 1 data point... that isn't out of the ordinary... it's not even an outlier... It's what was expected to happen...

They predicted the course of this hurricane while it was off the coast of Jamaica still a tropical storm at that point... not some stunning storm that was unpredictable... everyone was aware of this...

Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog : Hurricane Sandy pounding Jamaica, may hit U.S. this weekend; TS Tony forms | Weather Underground

Notice how many other times this had occured, from a tropical storm in that path... and how many models had it hiting the Mid-Atlantic/New England...

I'm sorry you have difficulty understanding what I said, and can't understand the intricacies...

What I said is that I'm a fan of data... and data does not prove that there is a man-made climate change... There simply is not and has not been a steady increase in anything in correlation to man’s technological advances or rise in population. There is not a rise in the frequency or severity of weather patterns… All the attempts to make that case are not backed up by the data… The only fluctuations tend to coincide with increased seismic activity…

That is science… I’m not against science… and I’m certainly no bible thumper…

When you have to admit eventually that global climate change is an unproven theory, and not a scientific fact, then we can continue this discussion… as to the merits of the theory, but instead, you’re unscientifically jumping the gun and making knee-jerk decisions… That’s not scientific that’s the same type of go with your gut decision making that is what made GWB such an awful leader…
Click to expand...

Perhaps I misunderstood you, you seem to have taken the position that man made climate change isn't a rock solid fact, which is debatable I suppose, many see it as a fact. Sandy was likely strengthened by climate change, a storm that powerful at that time of year is unusual to say the least, that is all I claim.
 
Verax said:
He has blocked the Keystone pipeline and pushed for tougher regulations to shut down, slow down, coal plants. He has pushed for investment in green technology, waaaaah Solyndra waaaaah. He has pushed for stricter MPG efficiency in vehicles over the next decade.

He has done everything he can, how do you not notice? Do you not even pay attention or research anything? You just say ****?
Click to expand...

I live in Pennsylvania, And Obama's push for green energy here is hell on Earth for us. This state is known for Coal and Steel, And Through Obama's "War on Coal" several plants have shutdown in the area where I live. That's hundreds of jobs lost in an area that has been labeled as "Distressed" since the steel mill shutdowns of the 70s. With more people now without a job and on food stamps, There is no longer a valid reason to believe that Obama will give us jobs.
He pushed for green energy way to fast, and instead walked all over lower middle class, blue collar Americans, who needed these mining jobs to keep their way of life.
 
Lukas105 said:
I live in Pennsylvania, And Obama's push for green energy here is hell on Earth for us. This state is known for Coal and Steel, And Through Obama's "War on Coal" several plants have shutdown in the area where I live. That's hundreds of jobs lost in an area that has been labeled as "Distressed" since the steel mill shutdowns of the 70s. With more people now without a job and on food stamps, There is no longer a valid reason to believe that Obama will give us jobs.
He pushed for green energy way to fast, and instead walked all over lower middle class, blue collar Americans, who needed these mining jobs to keep their way of life.
Click to expand...

I can understand the pain that causes but... if climate change plays out badly we're talking trillions of dollars in consequences. If you want to blame somebody though blame those that have peddled fossil fuels for the last 3 decades when they knew damn well it was a bad road to go down. Look at what we do in the middle east for oil, it doesn't have to be like this. However the transition will be painful but I believe it is necessary.
 
Verax said:
I can understand the pain that causes but... if climate change plays out badly we're talking trillions of dollars in consequences. If you want to blame somebody though blame those that have peddled fossil fuels for the last 3 decades when they knew damn well it was a bad road to go down. Look at what we do in the middle east for oil, it doesn't have to be like this. However the transition will be painful but I believe it is necessary.
Click to expand...

The Only way the both sides can get what they want it for us to still use Fossil Fuels until renewable energy can take the full blunt of our energy demand, and blue collar industries can slowly be switched over to being more green. I have to move out of where I live, The only industry left now is the medical field, but that is swamped with new college graduates.
I fear things will only get worse around here.
As for the dependence of foreign oil, That's an argument over our terrible foreign policy. (My View is Ron Paul's Foreign Policy of Non-Interventionism)
 
Verax said:
Perhaps I misunderstood you, you seem to have taken the position that man made climate change isn't a rock solid fact, which is debatable I suppose, many see it as a fact. Sandy was likely strengthened by climate change, a storm that powerful at that time of year is unusual to say the least, that is all I claim.
Click to expand...

That's what I was saying... It wasn't strenghthened by climate change in any way...

Hurricane season for the north Atlantic is in its peak from August thru October, with September being the highest... but October storms are not all that unusual...

The Halloween Noreaster which became known as the Perfect Storm in 1991 was the model that they used to predict that Sandy was going to hit the North Atlantic as a slow moving Nor'easter... and it did...

1991 Perfect Storm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was a Category 1 hurricane... that strengthened from a 75-80mph wind storm to a 85-90mph wind storm as it crossed the warm waters of the Gulf Stream... This was not some major storm... It was a large slow moving storm...

The damage it caused, it caused because it coincided with lunar high tides, and hit areas that had poor hurricane preparedness... with roller coasters and ferris wheels along stretches of low lying coastal sandy beaches...

This is also getting the media attention because of where it hit... the NYC area... otherwise it's really not that big of a storm...
 
IndepCentristMA said:
baby-crying.jpg


The following rant was brought to you by the letter O...



Worlds+Smallest+Violin.jpg


I feel for you man... really, I do...

Then again... you have no idea what I've been through, and jump to your victim conclusions...

In the past few years, we here in MA have seen tornadoes, forest fires, earthquakes, hurricanes, nor’easters, ice storms, flooding, red tide, and just about any natural disaster you could name except volcanic eruption... But then again... that's not out of the ordinary either... As that has happened throughout time as well...

2/3rds of the town I grew up in burnt up in a huge forest fire...

The window in my kitchen doesn't close because a tree fell into it while I was in it...

When we get 100 winds from Nor’easters that last for 3 days, and are left without power with 3 feet of snow on the ground... it's not 90 degrees outside, it's sub 30, and you have to chop and burn wood that's frozen stiff to get water boiled in order to cook, bath, and stop from freezing to death (which many actually suffer from)…

No, I didn't watch your father suffering from mental delusions because his dialysis machine didn't have power... Instead I watched my mother have mental delusions and gasp for air as her fragile disease ridden body died when I was a teen... so spare me your bogus sob stories... you've still got your parents in your adult age... and I’m not here ignoring statistics and trying to claim cancer is the #1 killer in the US, that’s clearly heart disease…

I understand you have gotten swept up by your own imagination, to make it seem what you saw was so extraordinary that no one else has experienced it... but that doesn't fit the pattern... a one time suffering from a hurricane is not a unique experience... it's shared by numerous people in numerous parts of the world and has been for centuries...

Those aren't meaningless statistics... they are statistics which keep track of the frequency and severity of these natural disasters... yes, they are disasters... and they are an unfortunate and threatening part of nature... but that's nothing new... it's been this way since the beginning of time... and that's the reality of it...

Still, the statistics can not be doctored, they can not be forged... they are set in stone... and they can be tracked and measured...

What I’ve provided is a complete listing of those statistics… and while they show fluctuations over time, they do not show an increasing pattern of frequency and severity coinciding with industrialization…
Click to expand...

They weren't feelings of victimization and I'm sure you've seen your share. But again you presume things and are incorrect. I watched my father die screaming in pain and my mother gasping for air from heart failure. I was directly impacted by 4 storms in 2 years, not one. You are consistently wrong about your assumptions, which means you are probably wrong about your evaluation of the climate data.

I know throughout the earths history it has went through far more dramatic global changes though they're usually longer in transition. One poster (mod) told me you could bury all of civilizations footprint in a 35 mile by 100 mile hole. We're small compared to this planet but I can't help feel we're not going to be able to realistically sustain many more people. There were fairly severe crop failures this summer due to drought, which affect the cost of animal feed and food prices. The need for energy demands and up and coming industrialized nations is on the rise. The world is a five pound bag being stuffed full of ten pounds of crazy. There will be ramifications and fallout as we attempt to adapt and that's all I tried to point out. I or anyone can produce statistics to favor a particular view, it's not a Mensa level quality of productive effort. Ultimately, you've got to eyeball it out to reach any reasonable conclusion. But by all means prof stick with the information that suits your unbiased slant. :prof
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom