Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2013 18:16:05 GMT -5
By John Silveira "An ice age?" you ask. (I can hear you laughing.) "It's global warming, John! Ask Al Gore." But here's a piece of news Al Gore isn't going to tell you, nor are a great many liberal academics or media people: We have been in an ice age for the last 2.58 million years — and it's not over yet. The only reason we're not up to our ears in ice, right now, is because we're in an interglacial epoch—a warming period between glaciations—and unless the ice age is actually over, another glacial epoch is coming. When? No one knows. It could start this year or it could start 10,000 years from now, and when it happens it's going to come on fast, and it won't be pretty. More at the link... The coming ice age
|
|
|
Post by FrogAndBearCreations on Apr 20, 2013 19:16:26 GMT -5
anyone want a slurpee?
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Apr 20, 2013 19:43:50 GMT -5
Think the new ice age has already reached northern S.D. So far this "Spring", we've been running 10 - 25 degrees below normal temps.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 20, 2013 21:57:02 GMT -5
*L* Fight the coming ice age. Support global warming!....Mel
PS: It's been a long cold spring here in south Texas too. In the thirties last night. Bring on the summer!
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 20, 2013 23:23:19 GMT -5
Global warming = draconian weather change. Not just getting hotter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2013 0:12:39 GMT -5
Calling climate change a catastrophe is like calling the full moon a block of cheese. Neither comparison is true.
The climate is going to change with or without human input.
To usurp the concept for political gain is specious.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 21, 2013 0:34:23 GMT -5
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,558
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 21, 2013 5:38:53 GMT -5
Oh-marine fossils on mountains in the middle of the country-gee Beaver,how did they get there?Cycles man,natural temperature cycles I did pick the west side of Atlanta to reside in, mainly due to clean predominate winds from the gulf and Alabama.Meaning i prefer to live away from smog as much as possible and the efects it may have
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Apr 21, 2013 7:53:37 GMT -5
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Apr 21, 2013 8:10:34 GMT -5
Here's another good one. “Climate change” cools off www.redstate.com/2013/03/08/climate-change-cools-off/"These are not happy times for the Church of Global Warming, which has been trying to repackage its manufactured hysteria as “climate change” for several years. But according to the New York Times on Thursday, we’ve actually come full circle to where we began in the Seventies: global cooling. After some flapdoodle about global temperature spikes (in fact, not only is there no evidence connecting human activity to any such spike, most recent data says there wasn’t much of a “spike,” and what heating occurred mostly leveled out a decade ago) and quoting the ridiculous Michael Mann of “hockey stick graph hoax” fame as an “expert,” the Times casually drops the same narrative that global-warming cultists have decried as heresy for the past thirty years Though the paper is the most complete reconstruction of global temperature, it is roughly consistent with previous work on a regional scale. It suggests that changes in the amount and distribution of incoming sunlight, caused by wobbles in the earth’s orbit, contributed to a sharp temperature rise in the early Holocene. The climate then stabilized at relatively warm temperatures about 10,000 years ago, hitting a plateau that lasted for roughly 5,000 years, the paper shows. After that, shifts of incoming sunshine prompted a long, slow cooling trend. The cooling was interrupted, at least in the Northern Hemisphere, by a fairly brief spike during the Middle Ages, known as the Medieval Warm Period. (It was then that the Vikings settled Greenland, dying out there when the climate cooled again.) Scientists say that if natural factors were still governing the climate, the Northern Hemisphere would probably be destined to freeze over again in several thousand years. “We were on this downward slope, presumably going back toward another ice age,” Dr. Marcott said. Delingpole goes on to review polling data that shows most of the public doesn’t care about “climate change” and never really did, even back when Western nations weren’t grinding their way through endless recessions and limp “recoveries.” And yet, the Church of Global Warming rose to incredible power across the West, even as their demands were blithely ignored by authoritarian states. Countless billions in compulsory tithe has been extracted from taxpayers in America and Europe for this mandatory State religion. It doesn’t matter that most of the public never really bought into the hype, because they didn’t oppose it strongly enough, and the Left saw it as the perfect vehicle for a profoundly moralistic crusade in favor of Big Government. You planet-ravaging vermin can’t be trusted, with all your dirty machines and consumerist greed! You must be controlled, and those who resist are enemies of the planet itself, which speaks through a self-appointed environmentalist priesthood. No debate can be permitted, because we haven’t got a single moment to lose! And can you really blame us for erring on the side of caution, when the fate of the Earth is at stake? How can you doubt that industry is killing the world – can’t you see those billowing clouds of smoke, hear the ominous rumble of the machines, and smell the carbon? But the “consensus” in favor of climate change continues to slip away, with a “shock poll” last year showing that only 30 percent of meteorologists think global warming is worth worrying about. The radical Greens are reduced to squabbling over slices of a shrinking panic pie, with the wind and solar crowds at each others’ throats, and cultists scrambling to come up with reasons why greenhouse-gas-friendly “fracking” is really the Devil’s work. This week, Bloomberg News reported that “almost 90 percent of insurance companies lack a comprehensive plan to address climate change, and fewer than half of them view it as a likely source of financial losses.” The demon lords of global warming are no longer fearsome enough to command billions of dollars, and thousands of jobs, in sacrifice – not when voters worry that something has gone deeply, badly wrong with their economy. The heck of it all is that global cooling always was the more plausible, scientifically sound threat. Those solar energy variations really might presage a significant drop in planetary temperature. But global cooling wasn’t politically useful – it was too difficult to pin on human activity, and too hard to hype with voodoo fearmongering about wild weather patterns. The people could not easily be convinced that their machines were making the world colder. When they noticed it wasn’t getting consistently warmer, “global warming” became “climate change.” Then they noticed that the “climate change” elite wasn’t wasting any time acting as if their extravagant lifestyles were killing the Earth, descending upon million-dollar eco-conferences in mighty fleets of carbon-spewing jets. Now that Al Gore, the Pope of Global Warming, has lined his pockets with oil money, the game is pretty much over… and we’re left hoping that maybe his propaganda was just a little bit right, because Winter Is Coming, and man-made greenhouse-gas warming might be our best hope against it." Instead, scientists believe the enormous increase in greenhouse gases caused by industrialization will almost certainly prevent that. Wait, what? Sunlight affects global temperatures? Who could have seen that coming? For the moment, leave aside those sensationalist claims about “enormous increases in greenhouse gases caused by industrialization” – a simple enough observation given that pre-industrial societies produce very little greenhouse gas, outside of human and animal flatulence, but not logically connected to any measurable shift in global climate. Aren’t these scientists conceding that man-made global warming might be… good? Wouldn’t that mean the people who have been trying to bankrupt Western industry with madcap environmental laws have also been ignorantly shoving us into the frozen hell of a new Ice Age?"
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 21, 2013 8:45:51 GMT -5
I am leaving tomorrow, and I have nothing to do today because I got everything done. So I'm up for lots of arguing today:). LOL! First of all... I do not get my political information from Science sites. I do not get my science information from political sites. I would not get medical information from religious sites. That said, here's real life application for who REALLY believes what... the Insurance companies. This is from Marketwatch... stock site... who tracks insurance company profit/losses, and this is what INSURANCE companies believe: Global warming no hoax to insurance companies Al Lewis Commentary: Severe weather is already costing us
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — When it comes to global warming, it’s a tough call deciding whose hot air to believe: Al Gore or those AM radio right-wingers who call it hoax.
Me? I go with the insurance industry. If anyone is going to feel a rise in global temperature — and the destructive weather it causes around the planet — it’s the people who have to pay for the damage.
And here’s what insurance companies are reporting to state insurance commissioners:
“Genworth recognizes that climate change poses significant potential risks to the environment, the global economy and to human health and well being. We also recognize that human activity contributes to global warming.” — Genworth Life Insurance Co. of New York
“AIG was the first U.S.-based insurance company to adopt a public statement on the environment and climate change, recognizing the scientific consensus that climate change is a reality and is in large part the result of human activities that have led to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere.” — Chartis, a subsidiary of American International Group Inc. (US:AIG)
“The earth’s climate appears to be changing in ways inconsistent with the historical record upon which catastrophe models draw data.” — ACE USA
“Climate change could cause reduced loss predictability.” — RiverSource Life Insurance Co. of New York
“Commercial, residential, and marine property classes may be at risk because of climate change.” — General Reinsurance, a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (US:BRK.A) ((US:BRK.B) company.
“Swiss Re’s climate experts remain in close contact with the climate research community. Recent initiatives have looked at the effects of climate change on coastal flood damage and storm damage in Europe as well as the economics of climate adaptation...around the world, including Florida.” — Swiss Re AG (CH:SREN)
“USAA purchases enough reinsurance and holds enough capital to cover potential impacts of global warming.” — USAA
“With respect to longer term potential effects of climate change, such as health and food supply issues or potential depopulation of certain vulnerable areas, we have no exposure to vulnerable areas such as the Arctic or sub-Saharan Africa,” — Assured Guaranty, bond insurance
I cribbed these quotes from a report released last week by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners and a nonprofit research group, Ceres. It was supposed to be released earlier, but the release date was postponed because of Hurricane Irene.
“This year is a painful and important reminder that climate change will inflict damage across the U.S.,” said the report’s author, Sharlene Leurig, on a conference call. “Unfortunately, science is telling us that more years in the future are likely to look like 2011.” Now if it's not real... WHY would the INSURANCE companies take it into account?
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 21, 2013 8:51:10 GMT -5
Are you seriously trying to pawn off a Heritage Foundation article for Global warming/cooling Bill?
And the terms really are irrelevant. Global warming is a term used for the buildup of man's activities causing climate change. In places it's going to have a cooling effect, others a warming effect, and still others a drying effect.
Mankind has evolved in a relatively stable period of earth climactic history, with less of the turmoil than it could have and had been before. Of course the climate will naturally change with NO intervention by man, and there's nothing we can do about that. However, we DO know that man's changes to the climate may speed those processes along, and we get hit with colder colds, warmer warms, polar caps melting, more UV burning due to thinner ozones, drier dry leading to more wildfires, and these shifts lead to more hurricanes.
Can we deny that we have had more extreme weather over the last 10 years than we did the 40 years before that, or that more people have been affected by these weather changes, some in catastrophic ways?
"Global Warming" is NOT just warming, and if you take the seconds to read the links I posted from Science sites, you would know that.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 21, 2013 8:54:41 GMT -5
But... Marketwatch (and all the other Investment/Business websites) is a financial publication... not an insurance company. So lets find the INSURER's website, and LOOK!: www.insurancenetworking.com/news/insurance-climate-change-risk-ceres-30007-1.htmlClimate Change: Insurers Confirm Growing Risks, Costs
Stakeholders from the insurance industry met with members of the U.S. Senate to acknowledge the role global warming plays in extreme weather-related losses, and to issue a call for action.
Insurance Networking News, March 2, 2012 Pat Speer
The politics of global warming have typically involved much debate as to the role climate change plays in growing weather-related risk. Yesterday, however, at a Capital Hill a press conference on the cost of climate change, debate was not on the agenda. Pointing to a year of history-making, $1 billion-plus natural disasters, representatives of Tier 1 insurance companies took a definitive stance with members of the U.S. Senate to confirm that costs to taxpayers and businesses from extreme weather will continue to soar because of climate change.
Representatives from The Reinsurance Association of America, Swiss Re and Willis Re and Ceres, a nonprofit organization that leads a national coalition of investors, environmental organizations and other public interest groups working with companies to address a variety of sustainability challenges, joined Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) yesterday to discuss the growing financial impact of global warming.
“From our industry’s perspective, the footprints of climate change are around us and the trend of increasing damage to property and threat to lives is clear,” said Franklin Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America. “We need a national policy related to climate and weather.”
Property and casualty insurers in the United States experienced an estimated $44 billion in losses last year when hurricanes, droughts, tornadoes and other natural disasters were more severe, longer, more frequent and less predictable than in the past.
According to Swiss Re, the average weather-related insurance industry loss in the U.S. was about $3 billion a year in the 1980s compared to approximately $20 billion annually by the end of the past decade.
“As a member of the global insurance industry, we have witnessed the increased impact of weather-related events on our industry and around the world,” said Mark Way, head of Swiss Re's sustainability and climate change activities in the Americas. “A warming climate will only add to this trend of increasing losses, which is why action is needed now.”
The insurers cited Tropical Storm Irene as an example of one of the record 14 natural disasters in the United States last year that each caused more than $1 billion in damage. Irene alone, which first came ashore as a hurricane, killed at least 45 people and caused more than $7 billion in damage, affecting both Senators’ states.
“Perhaps no industry better understands the impact of global warming than the insurance industry whose job it is to analyze risk,” Sanders said. “I am pleased leaders in that industry are speaking out about the need to reverse global warming.”
Added Whitehouse, “Extreme weather events, like Rhode Island’s historic floods in 2010, can result in the loss of homes, livelihoods, and even lives. These extreme events fit a pattern predicted by climate scientists, and we should take action now to minimize the damage that carbon pollution is causing to our country and our world.”
Cynthia McHale, the insurance program director at Ceres, issued a more unequivocal statement: “Our climate is changing, human activity is helping to drive the change, and the costs of these extreme weather events are going to keep ballooning unless we break through our political paralysis, and bring down emissions that are warming our planet. If we continue on this path, extreme weather is certain to cause more homes and businesses to be uninsurable in the private insurance market, leaving the costs to taxpayers or individuals.”
“Extreme weather is a threat today and a greater threat tomorrow,” said Pete Thomas, chief risk officer at Willis Re, one of the world’s leading reinsurance intermediaries. “I’m pleased to see the federal government grappling with this issue. The continuing work of Sens. Sanders and Whitehouse is an important start for this necessary dialogue."
For more information on related topics, visit the following channels: •Claims •Insurance Network •Risk Management
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 21, 2013 8:57:15 GMT -5
So, the guys who must PAY for Global Warming are wanting something done.. but it's not real because the Heritage Foundation... the Republican Big Oil funded organization is spreading the gospel that it's not real.
And we should believe a political organization with deep polluter funded pockets over the insurers who must PAY for this problem and the people who STUDY this problem, including venerable 125 year old non-political science organizations that we get all our other information from.
I see.
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Apr 21, 2013 9:00:10 GMT -5
hahahaha, naw, I am more occupied with figuring out how to blame Global Cooling on the Lefties . . .
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 21, 2013 9:05:28 GMT -5
When looking up facts... one should always FOLLOW THE MONEY.
It's much like old timers watching the birds and bugs to tell when a storm is coming. Insurance companies are the best way to see if something like this is true or false... because THEY will pay if it's true.
And lo... they have been paying and paying. Did you see this part of the article?: “From our industry’s perspective, the footprints of climate change are around us and the trend of increasing damage to property and threat to lives is clear,” said Franklin Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America. “We need a national policy related to climate and weather.”
Property and casualty insurers in the United States experienced an estimated $44 billion in losses last year when hurricanes, droughts, tornadoes and other natural disasters were more severe, longer, more frequent and less predictable than in the past.
According to Swiss Re, the average weather-related insurance industry loss in the U.S. was about $3 billion a year in the 1980s compared to approximately $20 billion annually by the end of the past decade."
So, Climate change is NOT REAL? You own a beachfront home by any chance? You'd know if you did, because your Homeowners insurance today costs SOOOO much more.
And from Hurricane Sandy back to Hurricane Katrina, back to Hurricane Francis and Charley (who hit us), and hurricane Ivan (which took out Pensacola)... when for I dunno... 100 years before there was no hurricane comparable to ANY of them... I'd say SOMETHING in the weather's changed.
It's NATURAL to have 5 hurricanes that leveled US cities over the last 7 years when we had NO hurricanes before, and those hurricanes took out homes that were build nearly 200 years ago and stood with no problems whatsoever?
I know far less about the wildfires... but are those natural too?
Call it warming, call it cooling, anyone who can't see that the weather is CHANGING is a fool.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 21, 2013 9:11:57 GMT -5
hahahaha, naw, I am more occupied with figuring out how to blame Global Cooling on the Lefties . . . Well think of something good, I'm running to the store real quick, will be back for more soon:).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2013 9:51:48 GMT -5
No Helen, I think that climate change being real and natural is the point. Of course the climate changes. How could anyone dispute that? The wackos that think it is man made and reversible are the ones trying to lay claim to it. The sun is heating this planet and it goes through cycles short and long and very long... and probably even longer. We haven't been studying it long enough to know more. The concept that humans can change that is the epitome of egotistical thought.
Are you suggesting that because insurance companies are profiting from the mania this is proof that man made global climate change is true?
Please. I know you are much smarter than that.
I am with Mel. I'll take a little more warmth so as to avoid another glaciation.
|
|
robsrockshop
has rocks in the head
Member since August 2012
Posts: 715
|
Post by robsrockshop on Apr 21, 2013 9:59:20 GMT -5
Certainly feels like the ice age is coming here in Kansas im still burning wood. I like the links suggestion to lay in food and guns etc like that matters under 2 miles of ice lol.
There's nothing that can be done about it but people like Gore will get rich convincing you other wise. Never let a good crisis go to waste.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 21, 2013 10:05:10 GMT -5
*L* I blame all global warming on Helen. She types so much so fast that the friction from her keys heats up all the Florida air and changes global weather patterns....Mel
|
|