OK. How do you propose to stop climate change? Keep in mind that the planet's climate has been changing one way or the other before Man got here.
Acid rain probably is controllable. The El Nino/La Nino cycle has been going on since----- and is most likely not controllable. Here in the States we've done wonders with scrubbers on coal-burning plants so the stuff that causes acid rain gets caught before it gets into the atmosphere. We've also restricted severely the use of certain types of coal which are more likely to cause problems. But, it's never enough for those who want to ban the use of ALL fossil fuels in the belief that renewables can lead us into the future.
Bel has ceased to be even worth the effort. He'd rather believe the lies told by the warmunists than what his own senses tell him. There's no hope for something like that.
In other news: Seems the warmista crowd isn't happy just doing away with the pause. They're also doctoring the data from the Medieval Warm Period so that it wasn't so warm. Can't have it competing with the present-day "hottest EVER" drama, now can we?
Note: This past Summer may have been a bit warm, but hottest ever? Not around here it wasn't. In 1995, Cook County had to contract with LaGrou Transport for several refrigerated trucks. Too many died because of the heat (over 700) and the county needed the trailers to store bodies until the morgue technicians could get to them. Nothing like that has been seen before or since around here. Actually, Winter accounts for more weather-related deaths around here (heart attacks from shoveling snow, exposure, hypothermia) than Summer does.
That's the problem you have when you run across someone who has a memory that dates back several decades. It's hard to snow such a person unless he really wants to be snowed.
Last year, here in the American Midwest, we had a couple of strong "Polar Vortexes" roll out of Canada and make things incredibly bitter down here. It got below zero F several days, and highs didn't make it out of single digits F.
This year, a strong El Nino is in town, and weather forecasters say it should keep the polar air North where it belongs. We'll still get cold but not as cold, we'll get snow but maybe not crippling amounts of it.
You'd have to ask Midnight where he dredged it up from. I "resurrected" it because the very idea of getting into a chamber that has anything to do with liquid nitrogen is----- bizarre. Gotta say one thing though--- if the woman in the story did it for pain relief, it worked--- permanently.
A Las Vegas spa where an employee was found frozen and dead inside a liquid nitrogen chamber used for cryotherapy treatments wasn't licensed by the city, county or state to perform cosmetic or other procedures, authorities said Tuesday.
The disclosures followed the death of 24-year-old Chelsea Patricia Ake-Salvacion, who was found Oct. 20 in a chamber used to provide the increasingly popular but largely unregulated treatments for pain and other conditions.
"When they found her, she was rock solid frozen," Albert Ake, the dead woman's uncle, said in an interview from his home in Reno
The cyrotherapy sounds like quack medicine for all of the advertised uses mentioned in the article. Rejuvenice spa was found to be operating without required workers compensation insurance. The location where Chelsea died lack a license to perform the cosmetic and therapeutic procedures (but did have a general business license) and other location lacked even the business license (they applied four times and failed to pay the fee and still needed to be inspected. In Vegas that, consists of the guy coming in with a clipboard and saying "Looks good. Wanna go get some Starbucks?" :p) However, the spa was found not at fault for her death and no criminal charges were filed in that matter, since she wasn't supposed to use cryotherapy chamber after-hours for personal use (But I won't be surprised if someone at Rejuvenice told her it was okay...)
Great day in the morning! All I've ever done, trying not to accomplish death while I do it, is to sleep in the van at a rest-stop in Winter. That gets plenty cold enough, thank you very much. A cryogenic chamber with liquid nitrogen? How about "No".
(For those of you who might actually be worried: Don't be. The earth's climate is always changing; and life adapts.)
Speaks, between parentesis, the voice of ignorance.
Errr----ahhhhhh----- Bel, you're not doing so hot yourself. One liners that say nothing? I suppose I should expect that now though, since it seems you don't have any arrows left in your quiver. Oakdale spoke truth: The Earth's climate has been changing--- warmer or colder-- ever since creation. Medieval Warm Period, followed by Little Ice Age and so on. The best you could come up with is a one-liner about Oakdale's ignorance?
Here's some science for you. This concerns El Nino's effect on hurricanes in the Atlantic and the Central and Eastern Pacific. A strong El Nino tends to shut down the Atlantic hurricanes due to wind shear, but it strengthens Eastern Pacific hurricanes.
These super-agencies have so much power to force individual nations to toe the line.
Really?
Japan says it's going to kill 300 whales--- whaling ban or no.
India is "flashing the finger" at any agency that tries to stop it from burning coal. China is pretty much doing the same. India says it won't let renewable energy in unless coal works alongside it.
I think Belfrager was thinking of Gallipoli. In that battle in WW1, the Turks did a number on the British/Australian/NewZealand expeditionary forces.
The attack on Gallipoli was poorly managed from the start, and Churchill seemed determined to make every possible mistake that could be made planning the thing. His generals and admirals (this was part army and part navy) helped enormously in the mistake-making department.
The outcome might have been different if the Brits hadn't sent in antiquated equipment, and had taken their foe a little more seriously and planned accordingly.
OK, Bel---- you're on. Prove that I have any control over oil usage, beyond what I use in my vehicle. Prove that I set prices, that I in any way compel other people to use more oil and so on.
While we're at it, prove that I am against climate change. From what I understand, the Earth's climate has been see-sawing between cool and warm for eons. In fact, when this globe first came into existence it was a flaming ball of hot rocks, couldn't possibly support life as we know it. It's cooled down quite a bit from "hottest ever" status, from the look of things. Frankly, I have absolutely no idea how you stop a planet this size from changing its climate whenever it does so. I have no idea, supposing for a moment that CO2 is the bogeyman everybody says it is, how you would moderate it so you don't go from warming to ice-age---- and neither do your favorite scientists.
Belfrager has long past the point of no return in this discussion. We're Americans, therefore we're evil and our every motive is bad all the time, according to him. Ho hum.
The fact is that it's just a wee bit harder than banning all fossil fuels by this time tomorrow and going to a windfarm/solar power utopia. Things just don't work that way.
Look how long it took to replace the horse and buggy with the automobile. Decades. Even now you can find places where they will not use the automobile, and still use the horse and buggy as their means of transportation.
Wind-farms and solar power may come into their own someday. Right now, no plan exists that I know of that doesn't depend heavily on government subsidies, no plan exists that is commercially viable. (At least, not here in the States.) In the meantime fossil fuels get the job done for the foreseeable future.
Ity is a small passing point compared to the global situation but it has just been reported here in Scotland that there still 73 snow patches in northern Scotland from the winter of last year. They did no disappear at all during the summer.
I just read a report that some of those patches have been there since 1994. OK, far enough North, maybe in shady spots and so on---- so that's two reports I've seen of this counting yours.
Assad is part of the solution, not of the problem. As Hussein and Kadafi were.
It is strange why nobody questions such insistence by the American government in creating such a mess. In the bottom line they are shooting their own feet, while destroying everything else. Is it that what they call collateral damages?
I believe one must look for the answers at a radical different kind of explanations.
For some strange reason which I still can't figure out, we elected Obama twice. He shows unshakable resolve in knocking down current regimes, which has the tendency to leave the country which has lost its leader in an unstable condition. In this case, Putin is probably right in supporting Assad, and Obama is very likely wrong in trying to get Assad deposed. If Assad is tossed out, Syria will become a bigger hellhole of terrorist outfits than it already is.
Belfrager, I suspect you've caught RJHowie disease, and that's a bad disease to get. One of the signs of the disease is that you think anybody outside your hometown is less than human, and the further from your home it gets the less than human the inhabitants get.
OK--- that's a first. I've heard of double-barreled shotguns. They were--- and maybe still are-- common enough especially in rural districts. Double-barreled rifles? OK, I gotta look that up.
You're right about one thing though--- you don't want to be on the wrong end of a double-barreled weapon whether it's a shotgun or a rifle.
Edit; add-on: OK, looked it up. Yes, double-barreled rifles exist--- and they're serious big-bore big game hunting rifles. Get on the wrong end of an elephant gun--- you won't make that mistake twice.
Hmmm.... Oak, that does clear up something. Makes me think Turkey's side of the story isn't out of line anyway. It takes time to scramble a fighter jet and vector it into place so that it can fire a missile. Turkey said they were warning the Russians for 10 minutes--- I would guess it could take that long to get the Turkish fighter into position. Longer if it had to scramble from the ground.
The link below is from a source that certain people here consider "tainted". Go ahead and consider it tainted, you were gonna do that anyway.
It does point out something that I've been saying though: That "97% consensus" might not be quite as firm a number as we are being led to believe. There may be dissension within the ranks--- but those dissenters are told to shut up "or else". The scientist quoted in the link below dared to dissent, and for that she is banished from the climate community. Seems the warmist cult will stand for no questioning their dogma. See below:
Television and radio are the main purveyors of state-sponsored propaganda, you mean. All the news they want you to hear--- gotta go to other sources if you really want to find out anything.
