'Polar Vortex' to Blast Frigid Air Over Much of US

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


And some would suggest that everyone else is too stupid to have taken such a common sense approach, let alone having looked at it and ruled it out.

reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne


Hey, look at the bright side - For those of us who are willing to look at the reality of things, it should blow the whole "settled science" argument out of the water. Clearly, the science is not settled and never has been.

reply to post by CranialSponge


I remember one time when I was a little girl that we got hit with a major snow storm and frigid temps right after Thanksgiving. It stayed so cold after that that it wasn't until the first or middle of January when we hit the January "warm spell" that we saw temps in the 30s. Not only did that snow not melt off, but we were lucky if our daytime highs even approached 20 degrees that year in central Kansas where I grew up.

I am guessing that was a year where the polar vortex paid us a visit.

I remember it so well because I remember being so habituated to the cold that we were all wearing light jackets when the temps were right at freezing (32 degrees). That's how cold it was for a month or so.

So this sort of thing is hardly unheard of or unprecedented.

Spiramirabilis
reply to post by beezzer

 

I think that we need to look at the proposed "solutions" to Climate Change in order to determine validity.

So, if the 'solutions' don't meet with your approval - that means Climate Change isn't real? Sounds like good, solid science to me :-)

No wonder some of you deniers don't trust the science - I don't think you get what science is

It is real, it is a problem - and getting out of this without being 'inconvenienced' doesn't seem likely

But, time will tell I guess - and, I don't say that with humor or a bit of hope that I'm right - I'd rather be wrong

So, in a weird way beezzer - I hope you're right and the whole thing is just make believe

Nice! You omitted the part in my post where I stated "If the solution is just higher taxes and wealthier politicians, then perhaps the skeptics have a point."

But then again, maybe you have your own agenda?

Is it not true that rain weathering rock is the single largest contributor to "greenhouse gasses" on the planet, and when combined with other natural processes they constitute over 95% of said gasses released into the atmosphere? If I remember correctly the number is much higher than that even.

Anyways, that's what I came to understand a few years back listening to some climatologist speak after doing a 4 year study on arctic ice core samples and oceanic currents.

When I see that and then look at graphs like the one posted on the last page that show this to be cyclic in nature, I don't even bother debating this crap. The above poster is also correct that this is an issue brought to the front and center by politicians who's solution is higher taxes.

Propaganda. And the left soaks it up. End of story as far as I am concerned.

So again, stay safe folks. Its gonna be cold.

reply to post by Kali74


Indeed... That is where opinions vary and the concept of settled is a slogan coined by a man who never got much closer to science than his advisers in office.

Imagine...if global warming IS happening for that being the absolute and definitive trend ..and we spend trillions and decades to counter it ...only then to discover by accident, some natural process we could have countered much much earlier ..had assumption and presumption not ruled science for focus and outcome.

It's those little things that keep me from accepting either side of what we've watched become a global mud pit of conflicting science and/or experts. Either side, to include AGW, have very solid and persuasive points. The problem...is those aren't the sole points to come across that way.

reply to post by beezzer

But then again, maybe you have your own agenda?

I'll cop to that :-) Poking fun was absolutely part of my agenda

But it wasn't dishonest. Even including in the rest of your post - we are not going to get out of this without being inconvenienced beezzer - taxes or no

Sorry - no way around it - things are going to change. And I know the conservatives see this as some kind of leftist plot to take their money - but the fact remains: there is no free lunch

I know the planet seems like an inexhaustible ball of stuff and fun...

If (yes, if) real food shortages hit, and water is scarce - power - all of it - can't keep up with demand - what do you think is going to happen?

In a true free market economy where we're used to having pretty much everything we want - supply and demand will force the prices to skyrocket

If (if) it's worse than that? Who gets that food? Who gets that water? Who gets heat?

The solutions are not going to make anybody happy - this is reality

Unless of course you're right and this is all just a communist plot - (or is it TPTB?) then taxes would indeed be a sure sign that none of this is real, and that all the science was fabricated, and all the scientists are Reds - or at least Pinkos...and wow - wouldn't that be something?

:-)

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


I know you're not obtuse.

So just raising taxes and having wealthier politicians is a solution for you?

We're going to get lows in the 12-15 range here in the Dallas-Ft Worth area.

pretty brutal conditions for this part of the country.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


So, since it's been shown that all of the so-called solutions won't actually stop what they say is broke, why are they still bent on taxing us to go full steam ahead? Wouldn't they be smarter to concentrate on adaptive solutions instead?

And explain also how taxing and killing the economies of the Western world while leaving monsters like China and India alone does us any good.

ketsuko
reply to post by Spiramirabilis

 

So, since it's been shown that all of the so-called solutions won't actually stop what they say is broke, why are they still bent on taxing us to go full steam ahead? Wouldn't they be smarter to concentrate on adaptive solutions instead?

And explain also how taxing and killing the economies of the Western world while leaving monsters like China and India alone does us any good.

I feel like the second paragraph of this post is the best point made yet.

Its a global issue. Not an Al Gore issue. Wonder if he ever reduced his footprint by cutting back on that 3,500 dollar a month electric bill, by the way.

Furthermore, short of all-out weather manipulation I seriously doubt there is anything that can be done about it. And if you ask Superman, that didn't work out so well for the people of Krypton anyways.

I think we just gotta buy a parka or something. Go figure, humans need to adapt.

reply to post by ketsuko

So, since it's been shown that all of the so-called solutions won't actually stop what they say is broke, why are they still bent on taxing us to go full steam ahead? Wouldn't they be smarter to concentrate on adaptive solutions instead?

And explain also how taxing and killing the economies of the Western world while leaving monsters like China and India alone does us any good.

This is a world wide problem ketsuko - but we have contributed more than our fair share to it. Oddly enough - other countries are starting to wake up to this too...honestly - this is about all of us

How has it been shown that solutions won't help - in as much as we haven't really come up with any real solutions yet - let alone put them into action?

But as long as you bring up adaption versus prevention - I think you haven't really thought this all through to it's inevitable conclusion. We still stand a chance at keeping us under a few extra degrees of rising temperatures. That doesn't mean things will be all better - it simply means it might not be as bad. Who wouldn't want that?

But - those choices need to be made now

If this means charging for what we all use in order to keep it down - I'm all for it. I'm for anything - anything - that might forestall the worst of it. Adaption - yeah - we'll adapt. If we can. Those that can

That is not a world I want for future generations - and you wouldn't either if you really think this through

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


If we don't have any solutions, then what are they taxing us for?

reply to post by Kali74


GOOD....now you'll get to experience what we get every day of the fracking year!

reply to post by beezzer

I know you're not obtuse.

I'm not sure that's true - I think you might actually think I am

So just raising taxes and having wealthier politicians is a solution for you?

And this question is partly why I think you do

Honestly - you ask (here and elsewhere) what is it that we leftier people want?

The problem is with your question beezzer - this is not a partisan problem

All you see is the money - we're looking at a world wide global catastrophe - that cannot be proven (to you and others satisfaction) up front

Do you have any idea how crazy this is making people?

No - I don't suppose you do

reply to post by ketsuko


What are you even talking about?

:-)

Go ahead - use more words

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


Yes, you are right.
You have failed to prove there is legitimate concern to our satisfaction.

Yes, you are right.
You have failed to provide a solution to said "problem."

Yes, you are right.
It is driving some folks crazy.
But I ain't one of them. I layer up.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


Where did I introduce anything partisan?

What are the solutions other than higher taxes and wealthier politicians?

Spiramirabilis
reply to post by ketsuko

 

What are you even talking about?

:-)

Go ahead - use more words

They have told us that the solution is to institute a so-called carbon exchange or carbon tax.

But if, as you say, there is no real solution, then what are they taxing us for?

beezzer
reply to post by Spiramirabilis

 

Where did I introduce anything partisan?

What are the solutions other than higher taxes and wealthier politicians?

You didn't? Fair enough

Then why did you assume this in your earlier post?

So just raising taxes and having wealthier politicians is a solution for you?

I've never mentioned either - I've never objected to higher taxes as a possible solution - but that's never once been my pitch. I have been almost entirely devoted to trying to convince people this is something they need to pay attention to, so...what's up with any of that?

In a non-partisan post? :-)

I'm not sure why you keep bringing up wealthier politicians either. What do they have to do with anything? At least as far as climate change goes. Wealthier politicians seem to be a staple of politics period. What do they have to do with this?