The Big Cat Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Global Warming skeptic changes mind. "Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 I'm sold. Let's replace the coal plants with nuclear ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 I'm sold. Let's replace the coal plants with nuclear ones. Me too. I hope they start a war on air conditioning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Me too. I hope they start a war on air conditioning. I'm all for supporting the global warming is real movement but God knows I need my air conditioning it was 100 degrees here a few days ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 GooglesearchMuller lies. He's never been a "skeptic". New study WUWT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Global Warming skeptic changes mind. "Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause." That's science, not politics. Real science isn't salacious enough for "buzz". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 A note to those of you a little slow on the uptake; this is the place where you suggest that after arguing (though not really, but sorta, but not really) that one person voting ten times is nothing that requires voter ID laws...Big Cat tries to lead you down the path of his presumed argument that one person changing their mind about global warming/cooling/climate change/whatever should be good enough to change everyone's mind. He does this so he can then correct you by doing his best Vinny Barbarino. "What? Where? I didn't say anything. I just posted a link!" Just a heads up...don't waste your time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 A note to those of you a little slow on the uptake; this is the place where you suggest that after arguing (though not really, but sorta, but not really) that one person voting ten times is nothing that requires voter ID laws...Big Cat tries to lead you down the path of his presumed argument that one person changing their mind about global warming/cooling/climate change/whatever should be good enough to change everyone's mind. He does this so he can then correct you by doing his best Vinny Barbarino. "What? Where? I didn't say anything. I just posted a link!" Just a heads up...don't waste your time. Big Cat is convincing me climate change is real? I need to be convinced in 2012? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Big Cat is convincing me climate change is real? I need to be convinced in 2012? You don't need to be convinced of any liberal talking point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 You don't need to be convinced of any liberal talking point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 You don't need to be convinced of any liberal talking point. Classic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Those liberals and that climate change talking point what a knee slapper. Every now and then the crying baby is just spot on hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 GooglesearchMuller lies. He's never been a "skeptic". New study WUWT You know, I've never voted for a Democrat for president. This thread has convinced me of the error of my ways. In November, for the first time ever, I intend not to vote for a Democrat for president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 What will president Mitt Romney do about this problem? Or is franking for low climate change emission natural gas the answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) What will president Mitt Romney do about this problem? Or is franking for low climate change emission natural gas the answer? In the immediate future fracking for natural gas that produces 1/3 the carbon emission of coal is the solution b/c it's about the only thing that developing countries...the countries where pollution will increase the most in coming years...can afford. The actual answer is not just fracking, but fracking is apart of it. And of course the voodoo "clean energy" efforts that conservatives on this board seem to hate in lockstep are actually the answer and a big part of the short term mitigation as well as the long term answer. Edited July 31, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 1343706950[/url]' post='2517173']You know, I've never voted for a Democrat for president. This thread has convinced me of the error of my ways. In November, for the first time ever, I intend not to vote for a Democrat for president. Fine. But why'd ya quote my post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 In the immediate future fracking for natural gas that produces 1/3 the carbon emission of coal is the solution b/c it's about the only thing that developing countries...the countries where pollution will increase the most in coming years...can afford. The actual answer is not just fracking, but fracking is apart of it. And of course the voodoo "clean energy" efforts that conservatives on this board seem to hate in lockstep are actually the answer and a big part of the short term mitigation as well as the long term answer. What are the "voodoo, clean energy" efforts that conservatives on this board seem to hate? Do they make economic sense? How do they compare with the use of natural gas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) What will president Mitt Romney do about this problem? Or is franking for low climate change emission natural gas the answer? i can tell you that here in coal country, romney has overwhelming support. while king coal has always been cyclical, people here are worried that this time it might not come back. patriot coal filed for bankruptcy a couple of weeks ago. james river is on the rocks. but there's still a big market in china and the developing world. it's damn near impossible to ship natural gas (ng). so from an environmental standpoint coal is here for a while. most people thing ng prices have to go up and make coal competitive again. and fracking has its problems. waste water removal and earthquakes. when this gets fully parsed there will be troubles for ng production. Edited July 31, 2012 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 What will president Mitt Romney do about this problem? Or is franking for low climate change emission natural gas the answer? Let's see.....maybe he'll hand $.75 billion of taxpayer money to a company connected to some of his big donors, watch said company burn through the cash and go out of business within two years, then have a good belly laugh with those same buddies at a $30,000/plate fundraisers for his re-election campaign --- all while the media virtually ignores it. Yes, Mitt can! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Ok, so its confirmed and humans are to blame... so the question is, what are we willing to do about it? - People freak their !@#$ing **** when unleaded pops up 10 cents a gallon... are these people willing to sdopt cleaner more efficient tech for 2x, 3x, 4x the price if not more? - Are Americans willing to go the grocery store, where they also freak about price flectuation and pay substancially more because their pork and beans where delivered and manufactured using more expensive "green" tech? - Nuclear power is very efficient, clean, and safe- but everybody says not in my backyard. - The Government is basically almost broke, do we think they will be able to subsidize all this to make it essentially no cost to Americans (except the cost is in tax and borrowing) - Are we willing to be uncompetitive with countries who don't care about pollution? I don't think many are denying the issue at hand, the ice caps are melting and they have photo evidence, the contention is solving the problem.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts