_ _ _ _
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 164

Thread: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    lafayette
    Posts
    11,802

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    All we need to do is convince Isis to put catalytic converters on their vehicles or convince India to use smart cars...maybe China will will put filtration systems on their child labor sweatshops. Maybe all the far left liberal Hollywood types will park their jets and tour buses and start using bikes. Only humans are that arrogant to think we have that much impact. We aren't even a pimple on the earths ___ in the grand scheme of things. Does anyone know the long term effect of covering the earth with solar panels? No? Didn't think so.


  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Louisiana A
    Posts
    20,755
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Gibberish Jibberish!

    What does all this have to do with the price of Tea in China?

    http://m.phys.org/news/2016-04-monso...tea-yield.html

    PS just kidding about the gibberish part.


  3. #63
    VObserver's Avatar
    VObserver is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Abbeville, LA
    Posts
    5,787

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragin4U View Post
    1. Agreed
    2. Even if data shows that the climate is warming faster and more dramatically than average which coincides with increased levels of atmospheric CO2? Why do you think its part of the normal cycle?
    3. Absolutely. Doesnt it follow that increased levels trap more heat?
    4. http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-40-years-ago/ http://fortune.com/2015/09/16/exxon-climate-change/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/exxon...ange-research/
    5. Agreed.It just seems odd that they would pump billions of dollars into solar, wind, etc and then figure out they wouldnt make moey.

    And your last statement is disingenuous. Cow chips and wood arent used because they are not feasible not because people are trying to protect cow crap. Maybe governments are subsidizing renewables to keep ahead of the curb. From an economic standpoint it makes sense to diversify. Have you taken a look around Lafayette and Houston lately? Remember the '80s?
    Wood, grass and cow chips are not feasible, I agree. Neither are wind, solar or tidal energy systems. Which is exactly my point. Thanks for making it for me.

    With regard to 5, they invested in researching alternative energies because they have a vested interest in remaining the primary source of energy and the associated technologies indefinitely. Unlike governments, their only motive is economic. Once they knew that alternatives were economically not feasible at this time, they curtailed the flow of dollars into the research of said alternatives. Trust me, there are still scientists and engineers on big energy-related companies payroll who are busy trying to discover technologies that will make alternatives feasible. Just not as many, because they know it isn't close, yet.

  4. #64
    VObserver's Avatar
    VObserver is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Abbeville, LA
    Posts
    5,787

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Duplicate

    Last edited by VObserver; April 9th, 2016 at 03:40 pm. Reason: Dup

  5. #65
    Just1More's Avatar
    Just1More is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    16,121
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragin4U View Post
    Agreed. As a society we seemed to have moved towards an "all or nothing", "us against them", way of thinking. Our mutual interests are usually aligned but human nature tends to intervene. See Tragedy of the Commons
    That's nothing new. We should expect the most invested factions on opposing sides of an issue to press their singular one-sided view. It's the scientists I'm troubled with. Science itself is perfect. What's changed in recent times is the immediate release of conclusions, by scientists, that are not anywhere near completed science. Science, to me, is pure and perfect, by definition. Even when scientific study draws incorrect conclusions, more science is the only mechanism that corrects it. It isn't that man made climate change isn't factual. The conclusions are premature. And their prematurity is dangerous. There should be scientists, by huge volumes, throwing fits over what's being "concluded". And the fact that's not happening, is severely troubling. I could care less about corporate opinions or leftist environmental opinions. Science is the holy grail. There's no space in the beaker for human opinion.

    BTW... please wrap your good mind around what I actually said about the Valdez and the BP oil spill. I know oil got spilled. I know it's still around. Tar balls and oil slicks aren't the least bit wonderful. My comment was regarding what biologists stated were the long range impacts. And they were dead ___ wrong. Go back and read what they concluded from their original studies. It did not limit the impact to "there will be a tar ball or oil slick found on occasion". They sited tremendous biological disasters of a magnitude 1000 times what occurred... both in severity and length of time. They used every available model using every known sample and test method known to science... and they were dead ___ wrong. They just said "oh, that's ok... we probably forced greater care of our environment... so what's the damage?". In that case, nothing on a global scale. But getting man made climate change wrong is a mistake with massive far reaching consequences... politically.

    My request is "get the damn politics out of the beaker... and STFU until you converge on irrefutable science". It matters. The public is too stupid to know what the science presented means. Tree rings and hockey stick graphs already had many scientists "convinced". And that is downright tragic. This is too important to exaggerate the cause and effect. And had I not seen this before, I too would be an ignorant believer. That's the cool thing to do in this case... if you're a complete dumbass.

  6. #66
    CajunRed's Avatar
    CajunRed is offline Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,301

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragin4U View Post
    I'm not sure who "they" are.
    Facts include 2015 was warmest ever recorded. By a lot. Like 1.5 degrees C. Also over the past 20 years or so we have recorded 15 of the hottest years ever. Another fact is that Arctic sea ice levels are at historical minimums for the second straight year. Another fact is that new record lows for sea ice have happened consecutively over the past decade. Permafrost is melting at record rates in the Arctic. Sea levels have risen over 3 mm every year for the past 30 years. Atmospheric CO2 levels have steadily risen and correlate very well with these events.
    Those are facts. The conclusion is that human activity is playing some role in these events.
    Also thank you Red for the civil and thoughtful discussion
    Speaking of "they"...

    http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/16/al-go...imate-deniers/

    Al, along with many of his crackpot friends and followers, is now saying that non-believers need to be punished.

    -The former vice president focused on the need to "punish climate-change deniers, saying politicians should pay a price for rejecting 'accepted science,'" said the Chicago Tribune.

    -

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/17/sc...#ixzz45QThVHZj

    -The science on global warming is settled, so settled that 20 climate scientists are asking President Barack Obama to prosecute people who disagree with them on the science behind man-made global warming.

    -


    So..."they" happens to be all of the leftists, including these supposed scientists who haven't yet proven anything, who are demanding that any opposition or questioning be stopped and punished. But I haven't heard of any of them selling their large houses...or their private jets...or their luxury cars. They should be FORCED to drive those little battery powered toys that they want US to buy.


  7. #67
    Zeebart21's Avatar
    Zeebart21 is offline Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    17,776

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Just1More View Post
    That's nothing new. We should expect the most invested factions on opposing sides of an issue to press their singular one-sided view. It's the scientists I'm troubled with. Science itself is perfect. What's changed in recent times is the immediate release of conclusions, by scientists, that are not anywhere near completed science. Science, to me, is pure and perfect, by definition. Even when scientific study draws incorrect conclusions, more science is the only mechanism that corrects it. It isn't that man made climate change isn't factual. The conclusions are premature. And their prematurity is dangerous. There should be scientists, by huge volumes, throwing fits over what's being "concluded". And the fact that's not happening, is severely troubling. I could care less about corporate opinions or leftist environmental opinions. Science is the holy grail. There's no space in the beaker for human opinion.

    BTW... please wrap your good mind around what I actually said about the Valdez and the BP oil spill. I know oil got spilled. I know it's still around. Tar balls and oil slicks aren't the least bit wonderful. My comment was regarding what biologists stated were the long range impacts. And they were dead ___ wrong. Go back and read what they concluded from their original studies. It did not limit the impact to "there will be a tar ball or oil slick found on occasion". They sited tremendous biological disasters of a magnitude 1000 times what occurred... both in severity and length of time. They used every available model using every known sample and test method known to science... and they were dead ___ wrong. They just said "oh, that's ok... we probably forced greater care of our environment... so what's the damage?". In that case, nothing on a global scale. But getting man made climate change wrong is a mistake with massive far reaching consequences... politically.

    My request is "get the damn politics out of the beaker... and STFU until you converge on irrefutable science". It matters. The public is too stupid to know what the science presented means. Tree rings and hockey stick graphs already had many scientists "convinced". And that is downright tragic. This is too important to exaggerate the cause and effect. And had I not seen this before, I too would be an ignorant believer. That's the cool thing to do in this case... if you're a complete dumbass.
    Wait a minute, I thought 97% of the scientist agreed! Its settled science! We are going to hell in a hand basket!!!

    Z

  8. #68
    Zeebart21's Avatar
    Zeebart21 is offline Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    17,776

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by CajunRed View Post
    Speaking of "they"...

    http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/16/al-go...imate-deniers/

    Al, along with many of his crackpot friends and followers, is now saying that non-believers need to be punished.

    -The former vice president focused on the need to "punish climate-change deniers, saying politicians should pay a price for rejecting 'accepted science,'" said the Chicago Tribune.

    -

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/17/sc...#ixzz45QThVHZj

    -The science on global warming is settled, so settled that 20 climate scientists are asking President Barack Obama to prosecute people who disagree with them on the science behind man-made global warming.

    -


    So..."they" happens to be all of the leftists, including these supposed scientists who haven't yet proven anything, who are demanding that any opposition or questioning be stopped and punished. But I haven't heard of any of them selling their large houses...or their private jets...or their luxury cars. They should be FORCED to drive those little battery powered toys that they want US to buy.

    What the hell, you have to be forced to buy health care, why not force everyone to believe in Global warming, errr, climate change,err climate adjustment....

  9. #69
    Just1More's Avatar
    Just1More is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    16,121
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by CajunRed View Post
    So..."they" happens to be all of the leftists, including these supposed scientists who haven't yet proven anything, who are demanding that any opposition or questioning be stopped and punished. But I haven't heard of any of them selling their large houses...or their private jets...or their luxury cars. They should be FORCED to drive those little battery powered toys that they want US to buy.
    Ive actually thought we could all agree on laws that punish any "accepters" that haven't abandoned the use of petroleum products in all areas of their personal lives. This will stimulate and accelerate the discovery of "alternatives" while immediately reducing greenhouse gases. Afterall, 97% of scientists would immediately be living in the Stone Age. The incentive to solve numerous issues would be fantastic.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Louisiana A
    Posts
    20,755
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Another interesting current effect of Earth's ever changing climate.

    http://m.phys.org/news/2016-04-nasa-global-earth.html


  11. #71
    CajunRed's Avatar
    CajunRed is offline Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,301

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Turbine View Post
    Another interesting current effect of Earth's ever changing climate.

    http://m.phys.org/news/2016-04-nasa-global-earth.html
    Are you freakin kidding me. They never cease to amaze.

    I wonder if that wobble was impacted by all the prior times in history when the earth's temps warmed or cooled...or just this time.

    I can just see the new t-shirts now -- "Help protect the wobble"

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Louisiana A
    Posts
    20,755
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    This just in! Older scientist at A&M Colleges across the country are reporting trouble keeping their balance.

    Their observations are attributed to earths new found wobble, reports the Bearings Straight News.


  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Louisiana A
    Posts
    20,755
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    PS I try to make everyone happy.

    I cut my grass with a battery operated lawnmower, charged from an electrical plant operated on Natural Gas.


  14. #74
    Just1More's Avatar
    Just1More is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    16,121
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Turbine View Post
    PS I try to make everyone happy.

    I cut my grass with a battery operated lawnmower, charged from an electrical plant operated on Natural Gas.
    How do you figure that's keeping "everyone" happy. First, green freaks don't think grass should be cut at all. Their close cousins think only grazing animals should "cut it". You, my friend, are cutting your grass with the combination of 150 petroleum derived products. Your attempt at "going green" is only a thimble full of green paint in a vat of crude oil. LOL

  15. #75
    Boomer's Avatar
    Boomer is offline Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    19,366

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Just1More View Post
    How do you figure that's keeping "everyone" happy. First, green freaks don't think grass should be cut at all. Their close cousins think only grazing animals should "cut it". You, my friend, are cutting your grass with the combination of 150 petroleum derived products. Your attempt at "going green" is only a thimble full of green paint in a vat of crude oil. LOL
    ---I am not familiar at all with the legal events of the Oil spill but just wondering if any of these people who were mentioned with the gloom and doom scenarios were lawyered up for the trials---again I have no idea but know, as everybody else, that there were some huge payouts !!!

  16. #76
    Just1More's Avatar
    Just1More is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    16,121
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Boomer View Post
    ---I am not familiar at all with the legal events of the Oil spill but just wondering if any of these people who were mentioned with the gloom and doom scenarios were lawyered up for the trials---again I have no idea but know, as everybody else, that there were some huge payouts !!!
    Massive numbers of people were paid for no losses at all. But it's called cutting your losses and moving on. Civil trials never go well for the oil giants. Huge mistakes were made, a massive cleanup required, but denying the individuals that were damaged wasn't worth readjusting the damage claims.

    And no, just like with climate science, you will not see law suits against scientists for theorizing cause and effect incorrectly, or for theorizing consequences incorrectly. They provide their massive science study... nothing of which can anyone but another scientist in that massively fragmented component of climate science understand... and then as they're either paid directly, or strongly encouraged to give opinions, they weave the science together with their opinion and postulate. It is the latter that I find disturbing. It is also irresponsible for a biologist, or a molecular physicist, or a geophysist, or a bontanist, or a chemist, or even a meteorologist, to call themself a "climate change expert"... but that isn't stopping them. As they jointly produce fragments of data, and they get together and share, they ought to be infinitely more cautious on drawing conclusions. As I said prior, there are massive global consequences, politically, if they are off by any slight order of magnitude on about 10 factors involving climate theory. But politicians want the political juice this topic delivers... and for reasons I find disturbing... science has chosen sides politically. I actually know why... but it's a damning accusation on science that I just don't want to believe.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Louisiana A
    Posts
    20,755
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Just1More View Post
    How do you figure that's keeping "everyone" happy. First, green freaks don't think grass should be cut at all. Their close cousins think only grazing animals should "cut it". You, my friend, are cutting your grass with the combination of 150 petroleum derived products. Your attempt at "going green" is only a thimble full of green paint in a vat of crude oil. LOL
    I eat it.

  18. #78
    Just1More's Avatar
    Just1More is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    16,121
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragin4U View Post
    I hope that the current research is flawed, inflated, just plain wrong but I really dont think it is. I lean more towards the middle of most things and do on climate science as well. I think we are adding to global warming but I'm not convinced it will be the end of the human race as some think.
    I think you chose to step out of this topic... but I have to ask you a question. You've solidly defended the ethics of the scientists, and their skills, in drawing the pervasive conclusions (97% agree) on manmade climate change (not just minor change - but major change). They are saying that man is tinkering with the atmospheric incubator thermostat... to the peril of all mankind. But you added the above to your personal opinion on the subject. How can you say that you "lean toward the middle on this topic" at the same time you seem to place your faith in these "climate science" experts? In reality, there are few, if any, climate science experts. There are many disparate science experts studying fragments of data that contribute to the science of climate. But again, how can you defend these persons of science, but say that as they've drawn together in a 97% consensus, you "fall in the middle" on the subject? What is "the middle"? To me, there is no middle. I could care less about taking the extreme political viewpoints and adjusting to a pleasant "can we all get along" "middle". This is a science subject. And there is no middle. Science needs to provide definitive information. Let it land on the place it belongs. But "middle science" is no such thing.

  19. #79
    basinbear's Avatar
    basinbear is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Missouri City, TX.
    Posts
    5,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Just1More View Post
    How do you figure that's keeping "everyone" happy. First, green freaks don't think grass should be cut at all. Their close cousins think only grazing animals should "cut it". You, my friend, are cutting your grass with the combination of 150 petroleum derived products. Your attempt at "going green" is only a thimble full of green paint in a vat of crude oil. LOL
    Grazing animals can't cut your grass.....to many farts...

  20. #80
    Just1More's Avatar
    Just1More is online now Ragin Cajuns of Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns Greatest Fan Ever
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    16,121
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: New York Post uses University of Louisiana :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by basinbear View Post
    Grazing animals can't cut your grass.....to many farts...
    Fartologists are at the top of the climatology food chain.

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •