M0WYM wrote:
...
So you can't trust statistics - wow that's news. Better then to go
in for inane political mud slinging. You can always tell a dead
argument by the level on insults flying around. Insults over
evidence and an informed mind every time!


I don't know enough to make any absolute and highly accurate statements
on global warming or many of the environmental issues of today.

However, I do know this, lock yourself in your garage with your car
idling for a while and you may not leave that garage. And, I do believe
some sort of balance existed before man began taxing the natural systems
which support life on the planet.

I know the Salmon fishing industry is bust this year. I know there are
vast dead zones appearing in the oceans; some Coral reefs are
disappearing ...

I have a buddy who is a "camera freak" and he has taken me on freeway
overpasses with infrared cameras and shown me the "rivers of warm
exhaust" which the cars are passing through--left by the many cars which
have preceded them--each preceding vehicle spewing unknown quantities of
cubic feet of deadly gases ... I have seen traffic jams with most cars
idling--occupants behind rolled up windows--and, most likely, breathing
huge quantities of the noxious/odorless fumes. I don't even want to
consider power generation plants and businesses' contributions to all
this ... the megatons of spent nuclear materials in storage for
thousands of years, etc.

I know pollution from China has reached the west coast in
increasing-detectable levels and only adds to pollution levels which
then travel across America towards the east coast.

I wonder if and for how long we can just go about our tasks and ignore
all this? And, is this enough, or should this be enough, to begin
worrying prudent men and women?

I do know I can make one truthful statement; "I feel I would like to
keep my eyes open and my awareness level high."

I would like to think all this is still incapable of affecting the
atmosphere in such force and means as to affect communications! But
then, I have come to realize the saying, "truth is stranger than
fiction" can contain truth ...

I do think the aluminum/copper/zinc components of my antenna(s) seem to
show accelerated oxidation/damage--perhaps this is only imagined ... or,
silly fears fed by rumors of acid rain eating away at statues, masonry,
limestone, etc?

And yanno, I don't know who I would trust to believe on these subjects.
Trust the govt? Naaa. Trust big business who profit from generating
these pollutants? Naaa. I just may have lost my ability to trust anyone
.... not to mention "statistics manipulations" in general!

Perhaps I am just paranoid in general? Let's all hope ... that would be
quite nice, wouldn't it? Sometimes I just love being in error and
having only worried about nothing. Perhaps the future will make the
truth apparent.

Regards,
JS

Mike Coslo wrote:
Okay, just so I'm sure, you say that the pattern always repeats? And will
always repeat?

No, I'm saying the pattern has repeated itself for at
least the last million years and will most probably
repeat itself for the next million years.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

M0WYM wrote:
So you can't trust statistics - wow that's news.

Can we trust the statistic that says the global-warming/ice-age
cycle has repeated itself at 90K-150k year intervals for the
last half million years?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
M0WYM wrote:

So you can't trust statistics - wow that's news.


Can we trust the statistic that says the global-warming/ice-age
cycle has repeated itself at 90K-150k year intervals for the
last half million years?

No. There are indications are that the cycles which correlate with ice
ages, may not produce the conditions for another ice age for the next
60,000 years.
Alan

Cecil Moore wrote:
M0WYM wrote:

So you can't trust statistics - wow that's news.


Can we trust the statistic that says the global-warming/ice-age
cycle has repeated itself at 90K-150k year intervals for the
last half million years?

Further to my reply, look at
http://www.answers.com/topic/milanko...cat=technology

Alan

Alan Peake wrote:
There are indications are that the cycles which correlate with ice
ages, may not produce the conditions for another ice age for the next
60,000 years.

The last global warming peak was 130,000 years ago
and the longest previous cycle on record is 110,000
years. Seems that would indicate that we are already
thousands of years into the next ice age.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote in news:Pzy_j.1428$uE5.167
@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com:

M0WYM wrote:
So you can't trust statistics - wow that's news.

Can we trust the statistic that says the global-warming/ice-age
cycle has repeated itself at 90K-150k year intervals for the
last half million years?

How many of those cycles have been influenced by the release of green
house gases by humans?

It becomes almost a non-sequitar to bring that out.

But in search of an answer to your questions:

yes, there appears to be cyclic warming/cooling going on.

This warming/cooling has many possible sources. We're finding outh what
they are at this time. Some seem pretty likely, and some are not known
as of yet. CO@ levels look pretty convincing, and things like th
eMaunder minimum are almost just speculation.

Does the past allow us to predict what is going to happen tomorrow? Not
even close. All the cycles we have can only be applied after the fact.

That one is very important, because each and every cycle has
individuality. I've just seen something about a meteoric impact possibly
affecting the Clovis culture, and possible the glacier flow pattern into
the arctic and Atlantic Ocean. That is an individual event, not likely
to be repeated.

Neither is the release of large amounts of sequestered carbon. This can
happen in more than one fashion. It might come about through large scal
volcanic activity. It also might come about through the combustion of
those carbon bearing minerals. The source of the release is
inconsequential, the effects are not.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Mike Coslo wrote:
Does the past allow us to predict what is going to happen tomorrow?

The sun may not rise tomorrow, but I am willing to
bet my 401K that it will.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
Does the past allow us to predict what is going to happen tomorrow?

The sun may not rise tomorrow, but I am willing to
bet my 401K that it will.

Of course, even if it were to blink out tonight, it'll still do the
sunrise thing. That's pretty certain.

The issue is those long term cycles. The can predict trends, but can't
do a very good job of predicting if it will be rainy today, or if it
will even be a cold year or a warm year.

One of my favorite moments is on a cold day, some wag will spout "So
much for global warming!" Just a public expression of ignorance, whether
GW exists or not.

Let's make no mistake, we are making this experiment whether we want to
or not. There is no way that we are ever going to get the new industrial
powers to cut down on CO2 emissions. All of this discussion is academic.
We aren't going to cut down our emissions.

One of the delicious ironies in all this is that the same people who
declare anyone who believes in GW as some sort of leftist have staunch
allies who are commies in fact. Go figure.

My guess is that now that we have reached the geometric population
growth phase, we will deplete our oil, then our coal reserves. At that
point, greenhouse emissions will naturally drop.

As we tap into the "final reserves" of fossil fuel, likely anything that
is in the way will fall. Endangered animals, land preserves, pollution
controls. It will be pretty quick. Wars will break out over the
remaining fossil fuels.

Only so much can be done to conserve. Even if each person uses less
energy, there will be plenty of new folks coming along to negate that
conservation.

I've seen the future, and it isn't too pretty.

Although there is an alternative:

LOTS more nuc power. Give up on the antiquated and dangerous supply
paradigm, in which we just have a few plants running their equipment at
about as much power as they can handle, in which any failure makes for
big problems. Many smaller and safer plants are in order.

Unless there is some sort of breakthrough, we're going to need to run
electric cars. We need a new infrastructure built to handle them.

Wind power is cool, as is solar, but we jest aren't ready to get the
huge amount of power needed from those sources.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Michael Coslo wrote:
Although there is an alternative:

LOTS more nuc power...

And quit makin' babies.

Instead of the Fed Gov rewarding and encouraging
uteral exercise by tax cuts, welfare etc...Spend
the money on making adults smarter.

Give the Iraq vets tuition and rent. That would
make them smarter and better productive citizens.
That seems like a fabulous way to boost economy
and raise the quality of life of the population.
While we're at it, give them all a hybrid car.

Screw the welfare moms that keep reproducing at
my expense. That does nothing but waste money
and produce more mouths to feed, who will grow
up in a family that teaches/preaches poverty
and how to conduct a life that doesn't require
responsibility because "someone else will always
pay for your right to be here".

I'm enthusiastic about paying for the former.
I'm sick of paying for the latter.


Lumpy

You Played on Lawrence Welk?
Yes but no blue notes. Just blue hairs.

www.LumpyGuitar.net