Global warming?

[SamIam]

Russian hackers have also proved that Sarah Palin is an Islamic terrorist.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by SamIam

Russian hackers have also proved that Sarah Palin is an Islamic terrorist.

Maybe she will blow her self up in Congress so we can start over. :p

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I wouldn't be surprised by any of that.

And the moon landing were also scams. After all, wackos also proved that. Same logic also proved man is not a genetic mutation from other apes. Must be true because man could not have existed 50,000 years ago. Science also conspired to lie about that. How strange the same 'denials' also come from people who *knew* Saddam had WMDs - by ignoring facts and numbers.

[Griff]

Are you saying that we should ignore contrary evidence? True believers, like Cheney and Climate Researchers, need to stick presenting the facts.

[SamIam]

I'm fine with reliable evidence, but "Russian hackers" just don't get it for me.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by SamIam

I'm fine with reliable evidence, but "Russian hackers" just don't get it for me.

Word.

[xoxoxoBruce]

They're just the ones that stole it, Sam, one of the lab directors said what they stole was real.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Major, major global warming news today.

Does this mean warming is not happening? I still think it is, based on the measurements other than instrumental. If we go back to this chart from Wikipedia, I think it's the black line that's suspect, that's the instrumental line, which comes from that data:
The other measurements show warming too, just not as wickedly ramped up.

I agree, we know it's getting warmer. Just (still) a question of how much is our fault, how far it will go, what meaningful things we can do about it, if anything, and which remedies are just feel good wastes of time/money?

[Undertoad]

The reason the hackers hacked was because the lab didn't publish their data.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Russians forcing truthfulness and transparency. What's the world coming to?

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

... what meaningful things we can do about it, if anything, and which remedies are just feel good wastes of time/money?

Same innovations that solve so many other problems are also solutions to global warming. Put 10 gallons of gas in your car. How many gallons do any productive work? Somewhere between one and two. Over eight gallons of burned gasoline do nothing productive. Why? Because gasoline even at $5 per gallons is ridiculously cheap. Energy has always been too cheap to use efficiently.

Cruise down a level highway at 50 MPH. How many horsepower does it take to maintain 50 MPH? Somewhere between two and ten horsepower. Why is that 200 HP engine producing something like 100 horsepower? Why so much wasted energy? Energy is too cheap especially when the environmental costs do not appear on spread sheets.

"Why innovate?", asks a wacko extremist. Wackos love the status quo. Change means intelligent people (moderates) would make decisions. When Chrysler, GM, and Ford had hybrids designed in 1999 (using Federal government money), the greatest anti-Americans had them to scrap those innovations. Hybrids (innovation) was promoted by Clinton - therefore must be wrong. Anything from Clinton was obviously wrong – according to wackos. Politics tells wackos how to think – to even deny global warming. Automakers continued manufacturing obsolete technology and crappy 1968 technology V-8. Wacko solution: drill, drill, drill! Don't innovate. Don't do what every great American does - push out the envelope – think like an intelligent person – a moderate.

Same innovations that would make jobs, raise American standards of living, reduce cost of living, destroy poverty, reduce national debts, make wars less necessary, increase wealth, promote further innovations, advance science, increase American exports, etc ... also is a major solution to global warming.

Why is a technology developed in GM in 1975 still not in all GM cars some 35 years later? Why are best auto products from foreign designers? Because the US government did not force bean counters to innovate. Even entrenched those scumbags tens of $billions. Even enriched them with corporate welfare.

Solution to global warming is also the solution to our economics ills - innovation – “doing more with less energy every year”.

Instead, America that is a largest oil producer also must import more than 50% of what is consumed. According to wackos, this is good. Stifling innovation is what their political agenda advocates.

The list of potential solutions to global warming is quite long and is also what America needs to remain a world leader.

Burn ten gallons of gasoline. More than eight gallons do nothing productive. Instead, wackos would lie to create war to protect *OUR* oil as well as increase consumption, stifle innovations, welfare to the rich, and increase global warming. As George Jr said, we cannot stop it so we should not try. Wackos instead advocate war “to protect *OUR* oil”.

More than eight of ten gallons does nothing but contribute to global warming. What did wackos advocate? Stifle innovation, promote war, and waste most of the oil. That's more than eight out of ten gallons do nothing. Wackos using a political agenda say that (and the resulting wars) is good.

[Undertoad]

How many horsepower does it take to maintain 50 MPH? Somewhere between two and ten horsepower.

My lawnmower's engine is like 7HP, so if I hook it up to an axle, and drive on a flat road, I can eventually do 50? Cooool

[ZenGum]

Most of what has been (allegedly) exposed by these hackers constitutes an argument ad hominem. It doesn't really affect the argument.

There are plenty of opportunities for such attacks in the climate debate. Al Gore's movie is emotional, rhetorical, and just too damn long. Durkin's movie (The Great Global Warming Swindle) is filled with bad science, fake graphs, non-experts, and the Single-Cause fallacy (just count how many times someone says "The sun drives climate").

Stick to the evidence and reasoned argument based on it.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

My lawnmower's engine is like 7HP, so if I hook it up to an axle, and drive on a flat road, I can eventually do 50? Cooool

Who said that? I did not write that. Your 7 HP engine can maintain most any car at 50 MPH. Major difference.

How did engineers in the 1950s or 60s drive a 100 MPG car? Put a lawn mower sized engine in it. Nothing new. Then many myth purveyors blamed oil companies for subverting technology rather than learn facts - how 100 MPG was done

Why do freight trains move so much tonnage so many hundred miles on only one gallon of diesel fuel? Trains even in the 1930s were using hybrid technology. Nothing new. But using it in cars 75 years later requires innovation. Innovation is what Clinton promoted in 1994. Therefore wackos know is must be a lie and must be subverted only because Clinton promoted it. Their political agenda tells them what to believe. Also explains so many who knew Saddam had WMDs and that global warming does not exist. Science be damned.

How did a 1960s car get 100 MPG? It only needs a lawn mower engine to maintain 50 MPH - assuming proper application to the loads.

Those who don't innovate simply install a 200 HP engine because energy is so ridiculously cheap - and innovation is hard.

[Undertoad]

What if I start by going down a hill?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

What if I start by going down a hill?

Another example of adapting to a changing load. Or install an infinite ratio transmission with plenty of time to get up to speed. All is irrelevant to the point. Once up to speed, then a 100 hp engine must only output 8 or 10 horsepower (my worst cased numbers) or 2 to 4 horsepower (numbers provided by GM engineers).

How to solve global warming. Use engines that only output 5 horsepower when only 5 horsepower are required. That productively use more of every ten gallons. How to solve global warming? Do more using less energy every year. Better adjust to changing loads. Ignore lies from political extremists - such as hydrogen as a fuel. Or worshipping plug-in cars. Solutions mean innovating as Clinton promoted. Not stifling science and using lawyers to rewrite science papers as the enemies of science did.

Solution to global warming are also necessary to solve other economic, social, and health problems. Which means thinking like a moderate; not like a wacko extremist. That also means answers provided with numbers. Criticizing subjective (political) hearsay.