BMW E60 5-Series Forum | 5Post.com  
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  

Go Back   BMW E60 5-Series Forum | 5Post.com > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-09-2019, 04:34 PM   #419
NormanConquest
Major General
3321
Rep
5,016
Posts

Drives: 340i
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiseuille View Post
sadly, the Nielsen TV Ratings system was unable to provide us with audio of the millions of American viewers cheering as that sanctimonious shitforbrains was dragged from the train roof disappearing beneath the feet of an angry mob of sane people.
he's going to have a bad time
Appreciate 0
      11-10-2019, 07:31 AM   #420
c1pher
Primo Generalissimo
United_States
1866
Rep
2,659
Posts

Drives: Porsche Macan Turbo
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: DC area

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiseuille View Post
.
I’m not convinced that building and using electric vehicles is any more clean than gas vehicles. Besides mining and stripping the earth, creating terrible runoff issues, chemical processes in creating higher capacity batteries and then using the grid (running off coal in many cases) to refuel is much better than gas cars. And the rare earths required are just that. So what happens when everyone wants an EV? Don’t we run out of raw materials to do so unless we can use something else? We are just shifting where the pollution occurs.
Appreciate 1
Poiseuille4476.00

      11-10-2019, 10:22 AM   #421
///M4ster Yoda
Brigadier General
///M4ster Yoda's Avatar
3650
Rep
3,953
Posts

Drives: '16 F82 M4
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Long Island, NY

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zugzwang View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by c1pher View Post
I’m not convinced that building and using electric vehicles is any more clean than gas vehicles. Besides mining and stripping the earth, creating terrible runoff issues, chemical processes in creating higher capacity batteries and then using the grid (running off coal in many cases) to refuel is much better than gas cars. And the rare earths required are just that. So what happens when everyone wants an EV? Don’t we run out of raw materials to do so unless we can use something else? We are just shifting where the pollution occurs.
Picture everybody driving their ev’s home after work. Then they plug it in to charge. Turn on their electric ovens and air cons. Tv turns on.

Add in all those cars to an existing grid that can barely handle what its got and you will see it pop.

Things wont change. Gas stations will also become ev stations with three grades of charge for three prices. Small charge, medium charge and full charge.

Nothing will change.
The only thing that will change is who makes the money. Isn't that what this and everything else as always about.
__________________
'03 330 '04 325 '08 328 '11 335 '11 335is
'14 335 '16 340 '16 M4 (Retired)
4 ED's 1 PCD
Current Stable: '19 X3 (Wifey) '20 ZCP M4 (Mine)
Appreciate 2
Zugzwang1194.00
arkie6383.50

      11-10-2019, 10:44 PM   #422
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
9784
Rep
8,360
Posts

Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
Meh..the Deniers pulled this same trick



http://ossfoundation.us/projects/env...ncing-evidence

"To participate in the petition one only needs to mark a check box to show that one has a Ph.D., M.S., or B.S. degree, and then fill in the fields. Unfortunately, that means that anyone can sign the petition, whether they have a degree or not."
I have an MS from USC, where do I weigh in???
Appreciate 0
      11-11-2019, 12:14 AM   #423
NormanConquest
Major General
3321
Rep
5,016
Posts

Drives: 340i
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

And the faulty model continue to fail

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....9/2019GL084385
Appreciate 0
      11-11-2019, 09:59 AM   #424
adc100
Banned
1856
Rep
2,174
Posts

Drives: 2018 Forester XT
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Elizabethtown PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NormanConquest View Post
And the faulty model continue to fail

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....9/2019GL084385
You obviously got excited by the phrase "We examined the amplified Arctic warming over the past century simulated by 36 state‐of‐the‐art GCMs against observation. We found a clear difference between the simulations and the observation in terms of the evolution of the secular warming rates. "

Let me help ya here:

1. This is an abstract only.
2. It represents the opinion of one individual research effort
3. It merely indicates that the contribution to GW by the warming of the Arctic "MAY" be insignificant.
4. The key point though is that the Arctic is Warming and so is the planet. (You probably didn't digest that)

Honestly, you have no background to argue against the causes of MMGW. But it is certainly OK to express an opinion.

I have already given you the name of a book that explains causes of GW ("The Story of Earth"- Hazen)
A somewhat shorter book covering the Pleistocene Ice Age ... "Frozen Earth" by Macdougall is excelent. I realize you won't read it but its a recommendation to others who are actually open to learning.
Appreciate 0
      11-11-2019, 10:34 AM   #425
NormanConquest
Major General
3321
Rep
5,016
Posts

Drives: 340i
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
You obviously got excited by the phrase "We examined the amplified Arctic warming over the past century simulated by 36 state‐of‐the‐art GCMs against observation. We found a clear difference between the simulations and the observation in terms of the evolution of the secular warming rates. "

Let me help ya here:

1. This is an abstract only.
2. It represents the opinion of one individual research effort
3. It merely indicates that the contribution to GW by the warming of the Arctic "MAY" be insignificant.
4. The key point though is that the Arctic is Warming and so is the planet. (You probably didn't digest that)

Honestly, you have no background to argue against the causes of MMGW. But it is certainly OK to express an opinion.

I have already given you the name of a book that explains causes of GW ("The Story of Earth"- Hazen)
A somewhat shorter book covering the Pleistocene Ice Age ... "Frozen Earth" by Macdougall is excelent. I realize you won't read it but its a recommendation to others who are actually open to learning.
Half of the global warming projected is in the arctic, so if the model are extremely overestimating it what is the alarm. This combine with the Havard study last month on sea surface temperature data also being horrible wrong and tamper with to fit the model all i got to say is.
Drip
Drip
Drip
MM climate forcing hoax is slowly unraveling.
Appreciate 0
      11-11-2019, 12:34 PM   #426
TheWatchGuy
Lieutenant Colonel
TheWatchGuy's Avatar
2487
Rep
1,879
Posts

Drives: 335xi
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by c1pher View Post
I’m not convinced that building and using electric vehicles is any more clean than gas vehicles. Besides mining and stripping the earth, creating terrible runoff issues, chemical processes in creating higher capacity batteries and then using the grid (running off coal in many cases) to refuel is much better than gas cars. And the rare earths required are just that. So what happens when everyone wants an EV? Don’t we run out of raw materials to do so unless we can use something else? We are just shifting where the pollution occurs.
Its just shifting the pollution causes from big bad oil and gas to "environmentally friendly" "green" energy companies, most of which are ran and funded by big bad oil and gas companies. No real change, just shifting who is to blame. The bad thing is, we have a pretty good idea of Fossil Fuel Pollution, how to mitigate it, and how to correct it. We havent been messing with these "green" sources long enough to fully understand what things like battery mining/production/disposal can do to the environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zugzwang View Post
Picture everybody driving their ev’s home after work. Then they plug it in to charge. Turn on their electric ovens and air cons. Tv turns on.

Add in all those cars to an existing grid that can barely handle what its got and you will see it pop.

Things wont change. Gas stations will also become ev stations with three grades of charge for three prices. Small charge, medium charge and full charge.

Nothing will change.
The grid will fail, the renewable sources will not be able to keep up, and more efficient sources of energy will be utilized; Nuclear & Fossil Fuels. And since everyone is scared of Nuclear, Fossil Fuels here we come.
__________________
@drunkcowatches on ig

Am I a watch guy, or do i watch guys?
Appreciate 0
      11-12-2019, 11:29 AM   #427
NormanConquest
Major General
3321
Rep
5,016
Posts

Drives: 340i
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

https://www.helsinki.fi/en/news/life...sed-scientists

Lol now we got to kill all the trees or they have to admit that the greenhouse gas was much higher back when the planet was cover in trees.
Appreciate 0
      11-12-2019, 12:47 PM   #428
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
9784
Rep
8,360
Posts

Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NormanConquest View Post
https://www.helsinki.fi/en/news/life...sed-scientists

Lol now we got to kill all the trees or they have to admit that the greenhouse gas was much higher back when the planet was cover in trees.
Paper bags are BACK!!!!!
Appreciate 0
      11-12-2019, 02:12 PM   #429
adc100
Banned
1856
Rep
2,174
Posts

Drives: 2018 Forester XT
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Elizabethtown PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NormanConquest View Post
https://www.helsinki.fi/en/news/life...sed-scientists

Lol now we got to kill all the trees or they have to admit that the greenhouse gas was much higher back when the planet was cover in trees.
As usual you missed a few issues and did not look as the big picture:

In other words, the forest is efficient in recycling by breaking up organic matter found in the soil and releasing nitrogen in a form useable by plants, which trees then use for growing.E]ventually, the nitrogen is returned to the soil in the form of needle and leaf litter. A small portion of the recycled nitrogen ends up in the atmosphere as nitrous oxide, either directly from the soil or transported from the soil by trees.


And there is no quantitative answer on the amount of NO is put out by ALL trees in the Whole Planet.

"As there are no other studies published on the seasonal variation of the N2O exchange of trees, there is a great global demand for further research."

And of course you did not bother to check that NO released by trees is not even listed in importance of the GAS. The overwhelming majority is released by man.

And in the grand scheme of things NO is less than 1% of the CO2 impact. Again another "Word Bite" that is irrelevant.
Appreciate 0
      11-12-2019, 03:18 PM   #430
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
9784
Rep
8,360
Posts

Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
As usual you missed a few issues and did not look as the big picture:

In other words, the forest is efficient in recycling by breaking up organic matter found in the soil and releasing nitrogen in a form useable by plants, which trees then use for growing.E]ventually, the nitrogen is returned to the soil in the form of needle and leaf litter. A small portion of the recycled nitrogen ends up in the atmosphere as nitrous oxide, either directly from the soil or transported from the soil by trees.


And there is no quantitative answer on the amount of NO is put out by ALL trees in the Whole Planet.

"As there are no other studies published on the seasonal variation of the N2O exchange of trees, there is a great global demand for further research."

And of course you did not bother to check that NO released by trees is not even listed in importance of the GAS. The overwhelming majority is released by man.

And in the grand scheme of things NO is less than 1% of the CO2 impact. Again another "Word Bite" that is irrelevant.
Doesn't this point to just how LITTLE we actually understand cause/effect relationships in the global climate change arena??? ASSuming you say yes, how do we go about proposing regulations to curb it, when we don't really know what IT is???

You're a good scientist, leaving us with more questions as we get answers.
Appreciate 0
      11-12-2019, 04:36 PM   #431
adc100
Banned
1856
Rep
2,174
Posts

Drives: 2018 Forester XT
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Elizabethtown PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleWede View Post
Doesn't this point to just how LITTLE we actually understand cause/effect relationships in the global climate change arena??? ASSuming you say yes, how do we go about proposing regulations to curb it, when we don't really know what IT is???

You're a good scientist, leaving us with more questions as we get answers.
Actually. There is little point in trying to stop it. Its not affordable and our world economy depends on burning of fossil fuels.

As more and more people inhabit the earth and more and more rain forests get destroyed at a time when more fossil fuels are burned its a losing battle. Some problems have no solution and this is one of them. Even if we cut our carbon footprint in half the CO2 would change very little in the coming centuries.

CO2 levels during the Pleistocene Epoch ranged from 170 to 300 pppm. From 1880 to today it climbed from 300 ppm to over 400 ppm. Really nothing can change it.

In the past it varied because of alternating glaciers and plant growth. The rising of mountains led to weathering of rock which sequestered CO2 and reduced these levels. But these incremental changes took thousands to change CO2 levels by very small amounts.

Again well explained in "Frozen Earth" :cheers:
Appreciate 0
      11-12-2019, 06:17 PM   #432
MrRoboto
Brigadier General
Canada
1756
Rep
4,836
Posts

Drives: VO 1M
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NormanConquest View Post
Ezra Levant...quite the source for factual news.
Appreciate 0
      11-12-2019, 06:54 PM   #433
NormanConquest
Major General
3321
Rep
5,016
Posts

Drives: 340i
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboto View Post
Ezra Levant...quite the source for factual news.
What part of his report is false?
Appreciate 0
      11-13-2019, 11:34 AM   #434
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
9784
Rep
8,360
Posts

Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
Actually. There is little point in trying to stop it. Its not affordable and our world economy depends on burning of fossil fuels.

As more and more people inhabit the earth and more and more rain forests get destroyed at a time when more fossil fuels are burned its a losing battle. Some problems have no solution and this is one of them. Even if we cut our carbon footprint in half the CO2 would change very little in the coming centuries.

CO2 levels during the Pleistocene Epoch ranged from 170 to 300 pppm. From 1880 to today it climbed from 300 ppm to over 400 ppm. Really nothing can change it.

In the past it varied because of alternating glaciers and plant growth. The rising of mountains led to weathering of rock which sequestered CO2 and reduced these levels. But these incremental changes took thousands to change CO2 levels by very small amounts.

Again well explained in "Frozen Earth" :cheers:
I STILL remember (you know memory and old people aren't always used in the same sentence) back in late grade school/middle school having this image in my head of a hole in the atmosphere, with a big vacuum sucking all the pollution out of it. I have a bit of faith left that technology can still come up with a resonable way to scrub the CO2 to a level that we desire. Again, the challenge is: how many do we want? 200? 300? 267.358?
Appreciate 0
      11-13-2019, 11:38 AM   #435
NormanConquest
Major General
3321
Rep
5,016
Posts

Drives: 340i
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

How can the science be settle when we have so much uncertainty

https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/b.../computer.html

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....9/2019GL082442
Appreciate 1
      11-13-2019, 02:34 PM   #436
adc100
Banned
1856
Rep
2,174
Posts

Drives: 2018 Forester XT
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Elizabethtown PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NormanConquest View Post
How can the science be settle when we have so much uncertainty

https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/b.../computer.html
We are dealing with the study of cloud contribution to the whole GW picture-that is one part of many different causes-one. There are many more important things we do know. We do know that man is responsible for GW bc the science says so. At no time in the last 2.8 million years did the CO2 vary beyond 170 to 300ppm. In the last 140 it went from 300ppm to 400+ ppm. And we know by the isotopes its man generated. And of course you are talking 1996 information

They are indicating the exact prediction of the 25 models that predict global warming are between +1.5 and +4.5C and its unlikely to be Less than +2 C. By any standard 4.5 (C) (8F). would make the half of the earth which would be above water un-inhabitable.

Not sure you comprehended the article.
Appreciate 1
jmg8857.00

      11-13-2019, 05:09 PM   #437
MrRoboto
Brigadier General
Canada
1756
Rep
4,836
Posts

Drives: VO 1M
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NormanConquest View Post
What part of his report is false?
You need to do your research on Levant. He is basically the Canadian version of Alex Jones. He is our 'idiot'. Pay attention to him for entertainment purposes only.
Appreciate 0
      11-14-2019, 06:26 AM   #438
TomHudson
Major
615
Rep
1,102
Posts

Drives: 2011 E90 M3
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
We are dealing with the study of cloud contribution to the whole GW picture-that is one part of many different causes-one. There are many more important things we do know. We do know that man is responsible for GW bc the science says so. At no time in the last 2.8 million years did the CO2 vary beyond 170 to 300ppm. In the last 140 it went from 300ppm to 400+ ppm. And we know by the isotopes its man generated. And of course you are talking 1996 information



They are indicating the exact prediction of the 25 models that predict global warming are between +1.5 and +4.5C and its unlikely to be Less than +2 C. By any standard 4.5 (C) (8F). would make the half of the earth which would be above water un-inhabitable.

Not sure you comprehended the article.

Because “science says so”?

You’re referring to timelines that you claim CO2 levels that “CO2 vary beyond 170 to 300ppm”.
But despite that ridiculous statement, we’ve seen periods of global heat that put dinosaurs (reptiles) in every corner of the planet. So I guess CO2 isn’t a global warmer then?
We’ve also seen ocean levels fluctuate over 400 feet, with ice 4km thick covering North America. It melted, why? And it’s not supposed to melt anymore, even though they’re digging up dinosaur fossils in northern Alberta?

The convenience of using the term “science” like a religion is sickening, it’s turned into some twisted religion of “believers” and “deniers”

Extrapolating data from a period where industrialized human activity doesn’t even register on a climate scale, IS science, It’s just to be ignored.

Science isn’t a “thing” it’s a process, called the scientific method.

It’s absolutely idiotic to take 100 years of human industrialized activity, which TODAY represents -3% of total CO2, and claim “science” says this time the melting is from only 1st world nations, and by allowing China, India and Asia to continue polluting, dragging 100’s of millions of people into the industrialized age will fix it?

It’s a socialized construct that is generating a massive tax fund for wealth redistribution.

When did it start? When Al Gore lost to GW Bush, who had the support of the ........ oil and gas industry.
Appreciate 5
Zugzwang1194.00
arkie6383.50
SakhirM410280.50
N54Yankee2654.50
Poiseuille4476.00

      11-14-2019, 07:55 AM   #439
NormanConquest
Major General
3321
Rep
5,016
Posts

Drives: 340i
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboto View Post
You need to do your research on Levant. He is basically the Canadian version of Alex Jones. He is our 'idiot'. Pay attention to him for entertainment purposes only.
Once again what part of his report is false? I didn't ask for character assassination.
Appreciate 1
      11-14-2019, 09:35 AM   #440
adc100
Banned
1856
Rep
2,174
Posts

Drives: 2018 Forester XT
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Elizabethtown PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHudson View Post
Because “science says so”? .
Four takeaways from your post:

1. You don't understand the dynamics of how the climate is changing in the last 140 years. (btw-the increase from 300ppm to 400ppm C02 is 33% not 3%.)

2. You have no understanding how and why climate varied in the past and why.

3. You have a rigid opinion which can not change.

4. You don't seem to be able to be able to reason logically.

Again "if" you were interested on learning you could read."The Story of Earth". But that's not happening.

If you want to discuss one issue at a time instead of just ranting ,that's fine. :cheers:
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:05 AM.




5post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST