Jump to content

Welcome to our forums!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Welcome!

Thanks for stopping by the Weather Forums! Please take the time to register and join our community. Feel free to post or start new topics on anything related to the weather or the climate.


Photo

The 2014 National Climate Assessment ...


  • Please log in to reply

#1
richard mann

Posted 09 May 2014 - 12:47 PM

richard mann

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3415 posts
  • LocationParadise, CA

(.. cross reference to a thread that I initiated in the PNW Weather Observations section.)
 
 
http://theweatherforums.com/index.php?/topic/519-two-local-views-on-the-recent-national-climate-assessment-report/?p=27054
 
Materials referenced toward broader discussion here perhaps. But certainly general reference.


---twitter_logo-t12.png

#2
snow_wizard

Posted 11 May 2014 - 10:22 AM

snow_wizard

    The Snow Wizard

  • Mods
  • 10631 posts
  • LocationCovington, WA
I would expect a pretty similar response that you got in the PNW section. Many people don't buy the man made global warming agenda. There is simply too much evidence of much greater climate swings in the distant past...well before man had any power to affect anything.
Death To Warm Anomalies!
 
winter.jpg

Winter 2016-17 Stats

Total snow = 9.8"
Days Min 32 or below = 61
Days Max 32 or below = 1
Days Max Below 40 = 29
Coldest Min = 16

#3
richard mann

Posted 11 May 2014 - 06:37 PM

richard mann

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3415 posts
  • LocationParadise, CA

-
.. Too bad.
 
And thou I hadn't been expecting any response any different, more in particularlyeither there or herebut more less what I've gotten (.. your slant. What's been posted there looked at more basically.), .. as I'd suggested there, I'm certainly not interested in reading any, more sweeping general characterizations of the potential.
 
More again, hoping to hear perhaps, some additional thinking more sober and analyticalas within the two main articles that I've provided access tocertainly not working to "sell" anything.
 
As for my own view, ... the "many people" who "don't buy the man made global warming agenda", … 
 
Yourself included apparently, with your allowing yourself to have employed the term agenda, attached to the "idea". Too "biased" sounding. ? Theory then, if you (or "they") like, ...
 
.. might do well, where working to shoot holes in it, to first begin by approaching the potential, more benevolently. (Perhaps first, with not "referring to it" directly, at the outset of whatever "discussion" by "calling it" an "agenda" right out of the gate.) You know. As in, with a more prudent type of thinking in mind where workingon an ongoing basisto evaluate it, .. as opposed to one, however well peppered with "facts"certainly readily "available" for pointing to on either "side" of the "question"and much more ready (and willing) to "trash" whatever assessment suggesting the idea that "we" might perhaps have been, and or still may be, impacting the earth's over-all temperate with some of the more "questionable" things that we have allowed ourselves to "put" into the atmosphere.  (More soup. ?)
 
Need a better "clue" as to what type of approach that I'm referring to. ?
 
Perhaps start either whether from, or with .. what Neil DeGrasse Tyson has offered as a more "general" (?) perspective where considering the "theme"; .. within and as part of the most recent episode of his "Fox" television series "Cosmos", more "Earth Sciences" focused, both "Geological" and "Atmospherical". - The Lost Worlds of Planet Earth …  Timestamp: approx. 05:30 - 12:00 or so, maybe 23:30 / 25:00 - 29:30, 32:10 - 36:30… Or with just beginning at its main front.  (Trying your best not, to "parse" the whole of what's said, to suit / fit with whatever view. / .. point to Mr Tyson as being some sort of shill for some weak-minded group / attached to some unseen set of ideas meant to stifle economic progress, or fool whoever they can toward achieving continued funding support.)
 
More in general regarding this "theme", .. How about we agreefor a startthat any idea not wholly obvious and demonstrable more immediately, can either be bandied about, more radicallyand with opposing views, or camps holding them, adhering staunchly to a "general" position convenient enough to act - (or not), on—or more soberly, and more in earnest, until it becomes so.
 
(Or "not".)
 
".. silly warmists / .. naysayers." ?


---twitter_logo-t12.png