Global warming causes ship to be stranded
- Thread starter Kevdon22
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
- RO Number
- 30972
- Messages
- 2,127
Tony - You should go back and do some reading. Global Climate change has been happening for the entire life of this planet. Maybe as Hogan said, Dinasaur farts caused the last major change. Artic Ice has grown the last few years and research in Greenland has found farmed land under the ice sheet. The antarctic ice is larger than ever recorded. There has been absolutely no change in the base temperature for the last 15 or so years. The little ice age happened from 1350 - 1850. Although NASA has decided it was only 1550 to 1850. For 300 years prior to that we had the Medieval Warm Period. Now if you really want to get into it, we could look at radiocarbon dated ice samples that show that during the Medieval Warm Period the seas were approximately 1* C warmer than now and during the following little ice age 1* C cooler. Of course, you could take NOAA findings that claim the studies were to localized and there fore not valid. Curiously they get their funding from the very people promoting man made global warming. I could go on, or even get my friend who studies climatology to school you on it, but if just the above doesn't convince you that Man Made Global Warming is a money redistribution pyramid scheme, nothing will.
Tony,
I understand why you "believe" that Man caused Global Warming is real, mostly because that is the predominant story coming out of the media and many in our government; however John makes some good points that I have realized based on rather intensive study of the claims, the data, etc. over the last decade since I retired from a full time job.
I invite you and others to take a personal look at the facts since the science is not settled as claimed and the actual mechanisms that affect our temperature are much more complicated that presented in the main stream media.
The first question to be answered is the warming of the past 120 years caused by man or other mechanisms such as natural cycles. There is no scientific proof that man has caused all or any significant contribution to the observed warming since the late 1800's. Notice that the warming advocates typically start (cherry pick) from the end of one of the recent coldest periods when life on much of this planet was miserable due to the cold. Yes there has been warming since then but how much is caused by man's CO2 emissions? .
Further study reveals some questions that need to be considered and put into historical perspective.
1) We are still (I hope) in an interglacial period where the glaciers have been melting for hundreds of years, many of us are living in a location that were once covered by ice. Yes, glaciers have been melting over a long period.
2) There has been no warming for circa 18 years when one looks at all the "official" data sets even though CO2 has continued to rise significantly while still small. (CO2 is circa 400 ppm or .04% of the atmosphere). The connection between CO2 and temperature rise has been broken. Any rational scientist would be skeptical of the relationship.
3) Even the 2013 UN IPCC AR 5 has significantly reduced it's prediction for temperature rise http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/clip_image022_thumb.jpg?w=1204&h=904
"Unnoticed, the IPCC has slashed its global-warming predictions, implicitly rejecting the models on which it once so heavily and imprudently relied. In the second draft of the Fifth Assessment Report it had broadly agreed with the models that the world will warm by 0.4 to 1.0 Cº from 2016-2035 against 1986-2005. But in the final draft it quietly cut the 30-year projection to 0.3-0.7 Cº, saying the warming is more likely to be at the lower end of the range [equivalent to about 0.4 Cº over 30 years]. If that rate continued till 2100, global warming this century could be as little as 1.3 Cº." Has the MSM reported this?
4) The ice in Antarctica is at Record levels. http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
5) One reason for attempting to sail the Arctic in 2013 was a prediction from NASA scientists in 2008 that the Arctic would be “mostly free of ice by 2013.” Jay Zwally, the ice satellite project scientist at NASA Goddard, said in 2008 that the Arctic appeared to be at a “tipping point” from which there was no return."Arctic ice coverage had rebounded by 60% in 2013, forcing early closing of the passage and trapping sailors and climate tourists. Douglas Pohl, the North West Passage correspondent for Sail World, said the Passage became blocked in late August. “At least 22 yachts and other vessels are in the Arctic,” he reported on Aug. 29. “Some who were less advanced have retreated and others have abandoned their vessels. Still others are caught in the ice, in an unfolding, unresolved drama.”
6) Upon further study I have found that there has been a lot of unethical behavior by those who stand to realize financial reward including "scientists and politicians; e.g., climate gate, phony hockey stick, data manipulation, cherry picking, etc. that make me distrustful of many of the press releases.
Visit wattsupwiththat.com for further study.
I understand why you "believe" that Man caused Global Warming is real, mostly because that is the predominant story coming out of the media and many in our government; however John makes some good points that I have realized based on rather intensive study of the claims, the data, etc. over the last decade since I retired from a full time job.
I invite you and others to take a personal look at the facts since the science is not settled as claimed and the actual mechanisms that affect our temperature are much more complicated that presented in the main stream media.
The first question to be answered is the warming of the past 120 years caused by man or other mechanisms such as natural cycles. There is no scientific proof that man has caused all or any significant contribution to the observed warming since the late 1800's. Notice that the warming advocates typically start (cherry pick) from the end of one of the recent coldest periods when life on much of this planet was miserable due to the cold. Yes there has been warming since then but how much is caused by man's CO2 emissions? .
Further study reveals some questions that need to be considered and put into historical perspective.
1) We are still (I hope) in an interglacial period where the glaciers have been melting for hundreds of years, many of us are living in a location that were once covered by ice. Yes, glaciers have been melting over a long period.
2) There has been no warming for circa 18 years when one looks at all the "official" data sets even though CO2 has continued to rise significantly while still small. (CO2 is circa 400 ppm or .04% of the atmosphere). The connection between CO2 and temperature rise has been broken. Any rational scientist would be skeptical of the relationship.
3) Even the 2013 UN IPCC AR 5 has significantly reduced it's prediction for temperature rise http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/clip_image022_thumb.jpg?w=1204&h=904
"Unnoticed, the IPCC has slashed its global-warming predictions, implicitly rejecting the models on which it once so heavily and imprudently relied. In the second draft of the Fifth Assessment Report it had broadly agreed with the models that the world will warm by 0.4 to 1.0 Cº from 2016-2035 against 1986-2005. But in the final draft it quietly cut the 30-year projection to 0.3-0.7 Cº, saying the warming is more likely to be at the lower end of the range [equivalent to about 0.4 Cº over 30 years]. If that rate continued till 2100, global warming this century could be as little as 1.3 Cº." Has the MSM reported this?
4) The ice in Antarctica is at Record levels. http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
5) One reason for attempting to sail the Arctic in 2013 was a prediction from NASA scientists in 2008 that the Arctic would be “mostly free of ice by 2013.” Jay Zwally, the ice satellite project scientist at NASA Goddard, said in 2008 that the Arctic appeared to be at a “tipping point” from which there was no return."Arctic ice coverage had rebounded by 60% in 2013, forcing early closing of the passage and trapping sailors and climate tourists. Douglas Pohl, the North West Passage correspondent for Sail World, said the Passage became blocked in late August. “At least 22 yachts and other vessels are in the Arctic,” he reported on Aug. 29. “Some who were less advanced have retreated and others have abandoned their vessels. Still others are caught in the ice, in an unfolding, unresolved drama.”
6) Upon further study I have found that there has been a lot of unethical behavior by those who stand to realize financial reward including "scientists and politicians; e.g., climate gate, phony hockey stick, data manipulation, cherry picking, etc. that make me distrustful of many of the press releases.
Visit wattsupwiththat.com for further study.
Update
Are the US Taxpayers now on the hook for the rescue costs caused by careless global warming advocates on a publicity stunt? Or do we get reimbursed? I thought they said no one was in danger?
The Australian Maritime Safety Authority’s Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC Australia) has requested the US Coast Guard’s Polar Star icebreaker to assist the vessels MV Akademik Shokalskiy and Xue Long which are beset by ice in Commonwealth Bay.
At 122 metres, the Polar Star is one of the largest ships in the US Coast Guard fleet. It has a range of 16,000 nautical miles at 18 knots. The Polar Star has a crew of 140 people.
The Polar Star is able to continuously break ice up to 1.8 metres (6ft) while travelling at three (3) knots and can break ice over six (21ft) metres thick.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/...-trapped-in-ice-due-to-spiritofmawson-fiasco/
Are the US Taxpayers now on the hook for the rescue costs caused by careless global warming advocates on a publicity stunt? Or do we get reimbursed? I thought they said no one was in danger?
The Australian Maritime Safety Authority’s Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC Australia) has requested the US Coast Guard’s Polar Star icebreaker to assist the vessels MV Akademik Shokalskiy and Xue Long which are beset by ice in Commonwealth Bay.
At 122 metres, the Polar Star is one of the largest ships in the US Coast Guard fleet. It has a range of 16,000 nautical miles at 18 knots. The Polar Star has a crew of 140 people.
The Polar Star is able to continuously break ice up to 1.8 metres (6ft) while travelling at three (3) knots and can break ice over six (21ft) metres thick.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/...-trapped-in-ice-due-to-spiritofmawson-fiasco/
Just as I suspected. I found the medium breaker HEALY was in the Arctic, then shortly after learned POLAR STAR was headed South. Hope they buy the gas...
Polar Star Main Propulsion Plant:
Six Alco 16V-251F diesel engines (6 × 3,000 hp)
Three Pratt & Whitney FT-4A12 gas turbines (3 × 25,000 hp)
Polar Star Main Propulsion Plant:
Six Alco 16V-251F diesel engines (6 × 3,000 hp)
Three Pratt & Whitney FT-4A12 gas turbines (3 × 25,000 hp)
Tony,
I curious, how many $ billions are you willing to send to developing countries as "reparations" for our causing global warming?
"Three years ago, President Obama helped create a United Nations Green Slush Fund that would redistribute over $100 billion from developed countries to developing countries. While he has been racking up huge deficits and talking up tax increases, the President has already sent billions of American taxpayer dollars to the United Nations – and he’s managed to do it quietly so that no one will notice."
How many billions have already been handed over in the last three years? It’s hard to tell. There appears to be little in the way of transparency. Bloomberg reports that the European Union, the United States, Japan and other developed nations paid out in the range of $23 to $34 billion.
http://beforeitsnews.com/global-unr...illions-to-un-for-global-warming-2448712.html
The UN demands more:
UNITED NATIONS, July 5 (Reuters) - The United Nations on Thursday urged countries to impose international taxes to raise more than $400 billion a year, such as a carbon tax, a currency transaction tax and a billionaires tax, to offset cutbacks in aid by many countries amid global economic turmoil.
I curious, how many $ billions are you willing to send to developing countries as "reparations" for our causing global warming?
"Three years ago, President Obama helped create a United Nations Green Slush Fund that would redistribute over $100 billion from developed countries to developing countries. While he has been racking up huge deficits and talking up tax increases, the President has already sent billions of American taxpayer dollars to the United Nations – and he’s managed to do it quietly so that no one will notice."
How many billions have already been handed over in the last three years? It’s hard to tell. There appears to be little in the way of transparency. Bloomberg reports that the European Union, the United States, Japan and other developed nations paid out in the range of $23 to $34 billion.
http://beforeitsnews.com/global-unr...illions-to-un-for-global-warming-2448712.html
The UN demands more:
UNITED NATIONS, July 5 (Reuters) - The United Nations on Thursday urged countries to impose international taxes to raise more than $400 billion a year, such as a carbon tax, a currency transaction tax and a billionaires tax, to offset cutbacks in aid by many countries amid global economic turmoil.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2000
- RO Number
- 824
- Messages
- 2,405
Well that takes all the fun out of it. I was hoping for a continuing chain of comedic tragedy for at least a few more chapters before someone decided enough was enough and called in the CG to unfark things.
Oh no! Even the Australians are in on the hoax.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/03/australias-hottest-year-recorded-in-2013
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/03/australias-hottest-year-recorded-in-2013
MarcelR
There is a lot of suspicion about the Agency that tracks the temperature in Australia since the former Administration was in the tank for global warming.There has been claims that the data was adjusted. Weather is not climate except when there is warming.
2013 was not a good year for the warmist agenda, see
http://opinion.financialpost.com/20...arming-believers-2013-was-the-year-from-hell/
Last year the Australians voted to free themselves from the tyranny of carbon taxes by throwing out the eco administration that imposed severe global warming agenda's on their citizens. Other nations are "cooling" on global warming.
Hopefully US citizens will follow their lead and vote for liberty.
"Voters in Australia delivered a landslide victory for a more liberty-minded coalition on September 7 that ran on a market-friendly platform and vowed to abolish the deeply unpopular “carbon tax,” reportedly winning the biggest parliamentary majority in about a decade. The new prime minister, Tony Abbott (shown) of the Liberal Party, presented himself as a socially conservative leader who would rein in high taxes and spending while slashing foreign aid and half-baked “green” policies supposedly aimed at combating “global warming.” Evidently, Australians liked the plan.
The crushing defeat for the giant government-promoting Labor Party, which helped foist unpopular and hugely expensive pseudo-environmentalist policies on Australia, led to the resignation of party leader and former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. In the House of Representatives, it appears that Abbott’s coalition — composed of so-called “center-right” parties including his Liberal Party and the National Party — secured at least 91 out of 150 seats so far. About half of the Senate seats were also up for grabs, but the full results have not yet been released by the Australian Electoral Commission.
There is a lot of suspicion about the Agency that tracks the temperature in Australia since the former Administration was in the tank for global warming.There has been claims that the data was adjusted. Weather is not climate except when there is warming.
2013 was not a good year for the warmist agenda, see
http://opinion.financialpost.com/20...arming-believers-2013-was-the-year-from-hell/
Last year the Australians voted to free themselves from the tyranny of carbon taxes by throwing out the eco administration that imposed severe global warming agenda's on their citizens. Other nations are "cooling" on global warming.
Hopefully US citizens will follow their lead and vote for liberty.
"Voters in Australia delivered a landslide victory for a more liberty-minded coalition on September 7 that ran on a market-friendly platform and vowed to abolish the deeply unpopular “carbon tax,” reportedly winning the biggest parliamentary majority in about a decade. The new prime minister, Tony Abbott (shown) of the Liberal Party, presented himself as a socially conservative leader who would rein in high taxes and spending while slashing foreign aid and half-baked “green” policies supposedly aimed at combating “global warming.” Evidently, Australians liked the plan.
The crushing defeat for the giant government-promoting Labor Party, which helped foist unpopular and hugely expensive pseudo-environmentalist policies on Australia, led to the resignation of party leader and former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. In the House of Representatives, it appears that Abbott’s coalition — composed of so-called “center-right” parties including his Liberal Party and the National Party — secured at least 91 out of 150 seats so far. About half of the Senate seats were also up for grabs, but the full results have not yet been released by the Australian Electoral Commission.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2000
- RO Number
- 150
- Messages
- 1,216
a rational read on GW. Yes, GW is real, but what is the REAL deal about it.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/what-catastrophe_773268.html
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/what-catastrophe_773268.html
http://news.yahoo.com/trapped-chinese-vessel-39-breaks-antarctic-ice-39-111223788.html
Link I mentioned above.
Link I mentioned above.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2000
- RO Number
- 385
- Messages
- 2,884
Well, captainwjm and TonyB. I note you have a 55 footer and a 36 footer respectively. IF YOU really believe global warming is a problem why are YOU tooling around in such HUGE boats for PURE PLEASURE? Why don't we come and take those boats off your hands? I'll be the first to help and heck I won't even use them. I'll run ground glass through the engines, ah la "cash for clunkers" and I will hole the hulls just to make sure they can never contribute to global warming. That way, you "will not be whistling past the graveyard".
Well, I don't know these 2 guys, but fair is fair, don't you think?
The world burns approx. 8,000 million tons of coal every year. That is 8,000,000,000 tons.
http://www.worldcoal.org/resources/coal-statistics/
The world burns over 32 billion barrels of oil per year, approx. 90 million barrels per day. That is 3,780,000,000 gallons a day, every day.
http://www.iea.org/aboutus/faqs/oil/
The world burns about 3.5 trillion cubic meters of natural gas every year.
http://www.indexmundi.com/world/natural_gas_consumption.html
And the amount of wood burned world wide is almost impossible to calculate, because it is billions of people doing it individually.
So really, how much effect will disabling 2 boats have on the amount of fuel burned in the world?
Oh, I just noticed this post, responding to one of mine.
Words fail me when I try to describe the amazing scientific analysis that you have put forth on the subject. Just reading that analysis would just about make anyone change their mind on the subject. It boggles the mind to contemplate the amount of time you must have spent on formulating that response.
Thank you for your insightful comment. I am impressed by the depth of your intelligence. If only more people could be like you!
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2000
- RO Number
- 385
- Messages
- 2,884
Marcel, do you really think that demands for carbon reduction are going to leave the recreational marine industry unscathed? Look we already see what is going on with the EU carbon rules for airliners. Guess which ones just happen to meet EU rules, yep Airbus. So when the 99%ers make the rules about recreational use for fuel, do you think they might take a dim view of boating? YBYA and a 60 watt incandescent light bulb they will.
Look, I can show you an industry right now reeling from the effect of "socializing costs". It is called General Aviation( delivered jsut 271 single engine airplanes last year). Just google "Santa Monica Airport" and see what your fellow travelers are up to. Never mind a car on the Santa Monica Pier killed more people than airplanes at the airport that is not the point is it? No, you see Marcel, when you have something that 98% of the other people don't have, like a boat, you will get little thought and even less sympathy because like it or not to your fellow travelers you are the bourgeoisie and you must be dealt with your liberal leanings not withstanding. (which they consider BS cover anyway) If it were not for the fact that I would loose my boat when you loose yours, I would cheer them on just to see your disillusioned face.
Look, I can show you an industry right now reeling from the effect of "socializing costs". It is called General Aviation( delivered jsut 271 single engine airplanes last year). Just google "Santa Monica Airport" and see what your fellow travelers are up to. Never mind a car on the Santa Monica Pier killed more people than airplanes at the airport that is not the point is it? No, you see Marcel, when you have something that 98% of the other people don't have, like a boat, you will get little thought and even less sympathy because like it or not to your fellow travelers you are the bourgeoisie and you must be dealt with your liberal leanings not withstanding. (which they consider BS cover anyway) If it were not for the fact that I would loose my boat when you loose yours, I would cheer them on just to see your disillusioned face.
On my list of concerns, having the government take my boat is one item not on it.
The government won't have to confiscate boats. A few more storms like Hurricane Sandy will take care of the boats on the East Coast.
It will be interesting to see what damage occurs, and insurance rates rise to, when a Sandy marches through Florida. Sandy took care of 65,000 boats according to Boats US. How many do you have in Florida?
As I said, Mother Nature does not care what you believe, and she can be a real bitch.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2000
- RO Number
- 385
- Messages
- 2,884
No, no Marcel they won't "take your boat" directly. They'll make it just like General Aviation. Make sure the average consumer can't buy the gas for your boat economically and hit the industry with all kinds of lawsuits (like copper bottom paint). Then the death spiral starts. First, as boating hours decline, marinas start to close, transient dock space dries up. Then suppliers and manufacturers go bankrupt, and those that remain have to jack prices to remain in business. So when gas is too damn expensive and you have no place to dock your boat, what happens? You sell your boat...and they got you.
You can't see the forest for the trees can you?
You can't see the forest for the trees can you?
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
- RO Number
- 30972
- Messages
- 2,127
They never can GeeBee.