Green New Deal: Ocasio-Cortez aims to make air travel obsolete, aid those ‘unwilling’ to work

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

8 hours ago, refugee said:

The greenhouse effect documents why the planet retains more heat as Methane and Co2 accumulates. This correlates with the "hockey stick" effect that started in 1920s . Cloud cover is part of the equation, but in the end the planet is warming. But again, the science is out there for you to refute.

 

I am less concerned with planet earth (who is not a person)  surviving in some form and more concerned about our plan to mitigate the impact to our kids and grand kids.   My commitments are to the living. 

 

This young lady has the germ of a plan, and some are choosing to label her crazy, drug addled, hysterical,  ugly, communist  or immature instead of engaging in a rational discussion debate of the ideas. That is the sign of a group that has lost the argument.

 

 

YOU are the only one who has called her ugly.  I think she is hawt (until she talks, that is).

 

When the temps rise over 10° C, get back to me.  Meanwhile, this 1.5° doesn’t alarm me.  Nor am I worried about my grandkids just yet.  And no, those who think she is too far out there have NOT lost the argument. Wait til the democrats dump her, then let’s talk about what we’ll do next, eh?

Edited February 11, 2019 by ALFKAD

[Boiler 43,689]

33 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

YOU are the only one who has called her ugly.  I think she is hawt (until she talks, that is).

 

When the temps rise over 10° C, get back to me.  Meanwhile, this 1.5° doesn’t alarm me.  Nor am I worried about my grandkids just yet.  And no, those who think she is too far out there have NOT lost the argument. Wait til the democrats dump her, then let’s talk about what we’ll do next, eh?

If it gets that far you would be dead, last time there was that sort of difference was in the middle of the ice age. You would be growing bananas at the North Pole, temperature does not go up linearly Bit hotter at the equator, lot hotter at the poles..

[TBoneTX 43,408]

1 hour ago, ALFKAD said:

Wait til the democrats dump her

Can't remember who has suggested that Pelosi will keep her for fundraising purposes, then pull the rug out at some point.

[TBoneTX 43,408]

This pretty much puts the kibosh on the Green Deal:

https://www.heritage.org/energy-economics/commentary/green-new-deal-would-barely-change-earths-temperature-here-are-the

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, Boiler said:

If it gets that far you would be dead, last time there was that sort of difference was in the middle of the ice age. You would be growing bananas at the North Pole, temperature does not go up linearly Bit hotter at the equator, lot hotter at the poles..

I call... No.  I have lived were the temps were -54° F as well as where they were 125° F.  No one died unless they were being stupid.  I have endured tempurature swings of nearly 100° in one day.  Mean temps of 10° are a bit different, but I think very survivable for many years.  And as I stated, we are nowhere near that yet.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,330]

9 hours ago, Chris Duffy said:

She looks like a donkey now of days, I found an old video of her in college dancing.

 

She was hot and had a killer body, I am thinking she has had some breast augmentation surgery as well

 

 

Her being cute is the only thing she has going for her.  I knew a couple of really good looking dumb as dirt girls back in my single days.. They rocked 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

9 hours ago, Chris Duffy said:

She looks like a donkey now of days, I found an old video of her in college dancing.

 

She was hot and had a killer body, I am thinking she has had some breast augmentation surgery as well

 

 

LOL, that was not her dancing back in college.  That video premiered late last year.

[brien0512 61]

Its not really bout her looks, its about her crazy idea that makes her look like crazy .. everytime she talk it just doesnt make sense at all 

[TBoneTX 43,408]

7 hours ago, brien0512 said:

Its not really bout her looks, its about her crazy idea that makes her look like crazy .. everytime she talk it just doesnt make sense at all  

This was why I couldn't ever spend much time around even the hottest chica who had an Occasional Cortex.

[Dashinka 23,355]

22 hours ago, refugee said:

The greenhouse effect documents why the planet retains more heat as Methane and Co2 accumulates. This correlates with the "hockey stick" effect that started in 1920s . Cloud cover is part of the equation, but in the end the planet is warming. But again, the science is out there for you to refute.

 

I am less concerned with planet earth (who is not a person)  surviving in some form and more concerned about our plan to mitigate the impact to our kids and grand kids.   My commitments are to the living. 

 

This young lady has the germ of a plan, and some are choosing to label her crazy, drug addled, hysterical,  ugly, communist  or immature instead of engaging in a rational discussion debate of the ideas. That is the sign of a group that has lost the argument.

 

 

The interesting thing that seems to be ignored in the models that created the hockey stick is solar effects.  That great big fusion fireball in the sky has a lot more say in the climate of this planet than mankind ever will.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

13 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

The interesting thing that seems to be ignored in the models that created the hockey stick is solar effects.  That great big fusion fireball in the sky has a lot more say in the climate of this planet than mankind ever will.

Thank you.  Thank you.

 

and... Thank you!

[jg121783 3,908]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

The interesting thing that seems to be ignored in the models that created the hockey stick is solar effects.  That great big fusion fireball in the sky has a lot more say in the climate of this planet than mankind ever will.

That's just a conspiracy theory promoted by climate deniers.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

The interesting thing that seems to be ignored in the models that created the hockey stick is solar effects.  That great big fusion fireball in the sky has a lot more say in the climate of this planet than mankind ever will.

 

   That sounds good, but not really true. Models don't ignore the sun's output. They recognize that the energy output of the sun is extremely stable. Even at the low point of the Maunder minimum, you are talking about a decrease  of 0.25% in solar output, which is less than 1 degree Celsius. 

 

   The sun is about half way through the most stable part of a stars life cycle. It's output hasn't changed much in 4 billion years, and it shouldn't change much for about another 4 billion years. Of all the variables you would look at in a climate model, the output of the sun is one of the more predictable ones over the time frame we are talking about.  

[jg121783 3,908]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   That sounds good, but not really true. Models don't ignore the sun's output. They recognize that the energy output of the sun is extremely stable. Even at the low point of the Maunder minimum, you are talking about a decrease  of 0.25% in solar output, which is less than 1 degree Celsius. 

 

   The sun is about half way through the most stable part of a stars life cycle. It's output hasn't changed much in 4 billion years, and it shouldn't change much for about another 4 billion years. Of all the variables you would look at in a climate model, the output of the sun is one of the more predictable ones over the time frame we are talking about.  

This physicist of cosmic radiation seems to disagree with you:

 

http://notrickszone.com/2019/01/22/munich-conference-leading-danish-astrophysicist-says-solar-activity-has-significant-impact-on-global-climate/

 

By the way the Sun's output changes every 11 years not every 4 billion years. The other thing the global warming cultists don't take into account are changes in Earth's orbit around the sun. The gravitational pull from other planets causes the Earth to move closer to and further away from the sun which also causes variations in the Earth's climate. I doubt any of this is accounted for in the phony computer models that say suvs and cow farts are causing climate change.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

33 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

This physicist of cosmic radiation seems to disagree with you:

 

http://notrickszone.com/2019/01/22/munich-conference-leading-danish-astrophysicist-says-solar-activity-has-significant-impact-on-global-climate/

 

By the way the Sun's output changes every 11 years not every 4 billion years. The other thing the global warming cultists don't take into account are changes in Earth's orbit around the sun. The gravitational pull from other planets causes the Earth to move closer to and further away from the sun which also causes variations in the Earth's climate. I doubt any of this is accounted for in the phony computer models that say suvs and cow farts are causing climate change.

 

  As I said, the suns energy output changes by about 0.25% at most over the course of those 11 years. That is minuscule, and it's periodic. The temperature variation is +/- 1 degree. Output goes down then output goes up, but very easy to predict. IDK, I posted that clearly and it's not a difficult concept. Variations in the earths orbit cause more change than that. So do greenhouse gases. As we'll see in the next few years, entropy alone has more short term effect on climate than fluctuations in the suns energy output.

 

  The sun is obviously the most important factor in the earths climate. Changes in the suns output are not, because it's output doesn't change enough relative to other factors. If you look 5 billion years from now, then changes in solar output will be a huge variable, but 50 years from now it won't be. As we have already noted 2019 is a solar minimum. If the sun was the most important factor in year to year change, 2018 would have been a cold year. It was not. It was one of the warmest in the last 100 years. We'll be saying the same thing next year about 2019.