Climate Change Debunkers: Go outside much?

a reply to: DAZ21

True,but then the year before,we had zero snow all winter then we sudenly had 10ft drifts which took about 5 weeks to melt-and that was in late April,which should be our springtime.

I know thats only two weird years,but they were two very anomalous winters.

a reply to: DAZ21

How about 25 years of change.

I live in Denmark Scandinavia, i was a sailor starting 25 years ago sailing the northern hemisphere, every winter it was a constant battle against sea ice where assistance from huge ice breakers were the norm especially in the Baltic sea which was covered from coast to coast with either solid ice or drifting ice.

Today there is absolutely no sea ice to see anywhere not even on the coast, and the icebreakers have not been in use for 10 years at all.

It has now spread in land and lakes are now completely icefree every winter, where every winter public ice skating was normal, today it's forbidden, not because the ice is to thin, but because there is no ice .

a reply to: Gothar

I've stepped outside a lot--do it every day, in fact. Here in Norther Kentucky/Cincinnati Metro area, we've been skirting with record lows. Last summer, we had a very mild summer. The winter before that, we had many, many records for cold weather (wind chills of -34 degrees will stick with me for a while).

I grew up in California--Bakersfield, to be exact--and I have no pity on a state that allows over-population for the natural resources that it has. Hell, you guys transport water in from other areas and states, and you STILL are in a drought.

Put two and two together and realize that you're living in a state (or part of that state) that has been tapped dry. Adapt, or move. That's the problem with modern society--there's no realization that sometimes you must adapt or move.

But we agree on one point--the climate will always change, has always changed, and is changing. But I think we may differ on the causes of it.

a reply to: Mianeye

They don't really have to forbid ice skating when there is no ice, do they? Isn't that common sense?

a reply to: Mianeye

Then I'd say that we are in a transitional phase in the Earth's natural cycle.

Right now we are exiting a mini ice age phase, which will result in a shrinking or loss of the ice sheets.

Think about the climate in prehistoric times it's a huge oscillation from large ice age to a warmer climate, and between the two there are mini oscillations that are less severe changes in climate.

Visualise waves in the ocean, you have two sets of waves, the large ones, and the smaller ones on top, then occasionally you get oddities and small amounts of turbulence. Now imagine viewing the waves side on so you see the motion as a single line, and that is basically the same type of motion the Earth's climate moves in.

Basically it's all natural.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Mianeye

They don't really have to forbid ice skating when there is no ice, do they? Isn't that common sense?

It was sarcasm, but...swuush

originally posted by: yorkshirelad

originally posted by: Kali74
I don't think many debunk climate change, they just deny the actual reason it's changing... GHG's.

Is it getting warmer? If so where has the extra heat come from?

Even the AGW CO2 crowd recognizes that all energy comes from the sun.

Why they do not consider the sun's variability as a factor is a matter of faith.

On the plus side, many people are beginning to consider the possibility that taxes and totalitarianism won't help solve what may be a process outside of human control, frozen methane release from the ocean floor.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Mianeye

They don't really have to forbid ice skating when there is no ice, do they? Isn't that common sense?

Not now in this current world.....signs everywhere forbidding everything from filming a building to smelling the roses lest the roses kill you and the building might be classified information for who knows what.



Regards, Iwinder

Most people aren't denying a change. We're all effected one way or another by this 'change" or other similar word. It's just that the hyped up "manbearpig" propaganda, siding with carbon taxes, etc., brought about people thinking that it's not what it seems.

We barely had a winter in the Pacific Northwest, in contrast to the East's snowfall. Now we are seeing that the drought issues do not end in California. Washington State and Oregon's governor both declared a drought warning as of late due to the lessened amount of snow packs in the mountains.

The argument about the cause is distracting and separating us from preparing. I come from a long line of farmers. When the grocery shelves get hard to fill, it will be too late. I am planning a closed environment garden area. It is going to be expensive to install climate control and a permanent closure, but to eat it is worth it. All the nations should start preparing.

a reply to: Gothar

Where I live in North Yorkshire, the extreme weather is wind.

I have never known a winter where the frequency and intensity of wind has been this bad.

The climate is certainly changing on a massive scale, and it's inevitable that many millions will perish in the probably not so distant future.
Which actually is good.
It could be the earths way of dealing with out of control population growth.
Something has to happen this century for sure.

I don't believe it's man made. I think its a natural event, one that occurs periodically over time.
Think we all need to brace ourself for a very, very, turbulent future.

Sorry you are suffering water shortages, I have been up to speed on the California problem for a while. I hope things miraculously improve.

peace & good luck baby.

a reply to: Gothar

I was standing outside in the garden night before last...9:00 at night - barefoot

March - in Denver. Felt like June

This is just one thing I mention - there's so much more. There really isn't much point in my listing more - many of us have been noting this sort of thing for a few years now, but it all seems to have accelerated in the last 2 to 3 years

So, yes - the world changes. I've begun to accept that some people can't accept the reality for obvious reasons. Some people will accept the reality, but can't accept the cause - also for obvious reasons

No matter what else we do at this point, in order for us to function and survive these changes it will be necessary to accept the new normal, and the newer normal fast approaching

And maybe some of us will need to mourn. I've been paying my respects for a while now

Onward, ever onward...

a reply to: MOMof3

This is kinda the response I have been looking for. The reason for change at this point is not the issue. It is the lackluster attitude for preparedness, and yes, the weather is changing everywhere, not just my neck of the wood or even my neck of the hemisphere. The problem now arrising is how are we going to deal with the change. Florida decided to ban the words climate change, doesn't help the people right now on the coast who have to deal with "unplanned" but widespread flooding. Cutting carbon usage, giving california money to help with the drought. These things are long past making a difference. Instead of going over the edge, we are picking up speed on the way down. California is dumb, no doubt. 80% of our total water goes to agriculture. Most of it to SoCal. I don't argue that. What I do argue is the arguing. What I do argue is the people who keep saying "this is normal" but think it's going to change back or something? Change is normal, our lack of preparedness is not.

a reply to: Gothar

I have one suggestion of how to get Cali water. The Columbia River empties into the ocean. Why couldn't we build tunnels or something and divert that water to So California. I know we can prepare and minimize the losses but as you said, lackluster interest.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Gothar

I have one suggestion of how to get Cali water. The Columbia River empties into the ocean. Why couldn't we build tunnels or something and divert that water to So California. I know we can prepare and minimize the losses but as you said, lackluster interest.

Or,.......you could move.

a reply to: network dude

I don't live in California. I was just offering solutions.

a reply to: MOMof3

Sorry if that sounded harsh. Destroying an eco-system just to make sure some poor planning folks can remain living in a desert just sounds like a bad idea. They have already destroyed the Colorado river, it won't take much more to finish off the rest.

a reply to: network dude

The way to save everything is to make sure the population has food. If you want destruction of everything, including animals and the eco system, just let the masses get hungry. The only bad idea is no ideas. Whatever it takes, we should prepare. But we got better things to do, like war and meddle in other countries wars.

What kills me, is that my family and I are making adjustments and preparing. It will be the deniers that will come take what I saved up.