Exactly. Something short term by the AGW crowds definition of a climate shift event, 30 - 50 years if it goes against their views, has significant value and is to be taken as proof of their convictions but if a reverse of that proclaimed event action happens elsewhere like the number of well below average cold events in far more warmer regions such as the numerous hard freeze and snow events in the southern US have happened over the years they mean nothing.

A 50+ F above average run of weather in the polar regions is proof of AGW change yet a similar run of -50 F below norms weather in a more equatorial region is of no significance and just a weather anomaly to be dismissed (or proof that AGW can make things colder too) as that's just the weather doing what it does and no proof of any sort of climate change or lack thereof.

If someplace got warmer it's proof. If it stayed the same that's proof and if it got colder it's proof too and thusly everything everywhere is proof its real and happening and it's only fools who can't see it.

Don't waste your words on me. Sell it to Joey.

 

Yup, I sure miss all that good clean brown smog we had that I could smell when I stepped outside, when on a good day there was so much ozone my lungs would hurt such that it was hard to breath. Ah, the good old days.
I still don't trust breathing air I can't see.

I was NYC born and raised and as a kid one of my first jobs was driving a truck into and through NYC every day. I remember the LIE (Long Island Expressway) I-495 driving towards the midtown tunnel into Manhattan daily. Long Island City and Manhattan appeared on the horizon as an orange haze sort of orange glow with sunrise. My life in Cleveland, Ohio where I am today actually began in 1972 when as a 22 year old young Marine right out of Vietnam I was assigned as a Marine Corps recruiter to Cleveland, Ohio here on the shores of Lake Erie.

Cleveland has an area called "The Flats" which was home to the steel mills. The big steel mills like US Steel, Republic Steel and similar. The area glowed literally 24 hours a day and seven days a week. The glow of the furnaces could be seen for miles but it drove the economy. Like Pittsburgh, Cleveland was a steel town and those mills were good decent paying jobs. Steel drove this city, it was everything. The fame of the Cuyahoga river running through The Flats was it actually caught fire. Imagine a river so heavy with pollution it caught fire? Really Google it. Paint on newly painted building would turn a brownish and begin to peel within a few years as sulpher dioxide in the air acted on it. The smell actually was the smell of money and screw the river.

As the EPA intervened Cleveland, like other rust belt cities began to die. Today the lake and river are beautiful with great Lake Erie Perch and Walleye thriving but the economy took a hell of a hit. The air is clean, the smell long gone but the leaving smell took many jobs with it. The mills, like coal mines, often reflected several generations of a family employment. The problem is things went way too far and you can't just do a sudden stop. This is where I see a problem with the EPA. Gradual change is good and when for the better great but you can't simple do a sudden about face and not expect repercussion. Moderation is a good thing!

Ron

 

The problem is things went way too far and you can't just do a sudden stop. This is where I see a problem with the EPA. Gradual change is good and when for the better great but you can't simple do a sudden about face and not expect repercussion. Moderation is a good thing!

Thats my #1 problem with environmentalism now. It got pushed too far and largely by and for the very reasons of uncountable greed and dishonesty that created the pollution it was reducing.

Any system that is put into place that carries any degree of power to control some aspect of life and something people depend on will be the target of greed and corruption to get contorl over that power to control others lives. Especially if a profit can be made with it and rampant unrealistic environmentalism has already proven its self to be one of the most profitable concepts based on little more than public feel good perception and gross public ignorance ever created yet.

 

Don't waste your words on me. Sell it to Joey.

I wasn't saying it to you. I was agreeing with you. Unless You meant something else and it just came across to be the opposite of what the context of what you were trying to say implied.

 

I wasn't saying it to you. I was agreeing with you. Unless You meant something else and it just came across to be the opposite of what the context of what you were trying to say implied.

Sorry.

 

Thats my #1 problem with environmentalism now. It got pushed too far and largely by and for the very reasons of uncountable greed and dishonesty that created the pollution it was reducing.

This is what happens with too much and too fast. There is nothing wrong with setting environmental goals but setting unobtainable goals is foolish. Then of course enter those who stand to make a small fortune real quickly and feed at the government trough. I won't argue with that.

Ron

 

No goal is unattainable. Throw enough money at it, you can accomplish it. It may take years and gazillions of dollars.

At what cost is important.

At what benefit is another.

Yes, there will be disagreement s between costs and benefits.

Was the recession in Cleveland worth it? Only Cleveland can answer that.

 

Since the state-wide drought was caused by AGW, and their is no longer a state-wide drought, is this not proof of no AGW?

 

I also find it interesting that only a Trump election was required to solve California's drought problem. And they voted against him. Par for the course (voting against their own interests).

 

Since the state-wide drought was caused by AGW, and their is no longer a state-wide drought, is this not proof of no AGW?

You need to get onboard with the new lingo: It's "climate change" now. Did the climate change? Yup. Well there you go.

 

I also find it interesting that only a Trump election was required to solve California's drought problem.

How so? No sarcasm, just interested since Trump has managed to make all the news regarding him fit the Kardashian's model of publicity by stupidity reach epic powerful levels. :|

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/02/climate-science-rocked-by-another-scandal.php

 

If there were wrong doings, there needs to be an adjudication.

 

If there were wrong doings, there needs to be an adjudication.

That would be nice but it would draw attention to it. I suspect there would be a lot of pressure to sweep it away from public view.

 

So that's like the 3rd or 4th (or how many now) that the AGW/climate change leaders have been caught red handed lying and cheating?

I don't know about anyone else but how many times does the preacher have to be caught with his pants down and a choir boy with lube in hand before the congregation starts realize that just maybe they are being lied to and may have been lied to the whole time about what is really going on in the broom closet?

Fool me once. Shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me . Fool me three times and it's obvious I am more gullible than a goat and twice as dumb to boot.

The more in depth report here regarding the obvious plagiarism of far from reliable or relevant sources used to back some of the reports that were used for reference.

The review argued that the world had to take immediate action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or face much higher future costs. It has exerted a powerful influence on successive British governments and international bodies.

Part of the CCCEP's official mission, which it often boasts about in its public reports, is to lobby for the policies Lord Stern advocates by presenting the case for them with British and foreign governments and at UN climate talks.

Last night, CCCEP spokesman Bob Ward admitted it had 'made mistakes', both in claiming credit for studies which it had not funded and for papers published by rival academics. 'This is regrettable, but mistakes can happen… We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,' he said.

from,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-research-bankroll-climate-change-agenda.html

And more stuff.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

 

Fool me three times and it's obvious I am more gullible than a goat and twice as dumb to boot.

Or you have an agenda and you don't mind using falsified data to push it.

 

Or you have an agenda and you don't mind using falsified data to push it.

Well yea, but at least I am honest about being willing to lie to get what I want done how I want it done.

 

Someone's gonna lose his research grant...

Abstract:
Evidence from the American Time Use Survey 2003-12 suggests the existence of small but statistically significant racial/ethnic differences in time spent not working at the workplace. Minorities, especially men, spend a greater fraction of their workdays not working than do white non-Hispanics. These differences are robust to the inclusion of large numbers of demographic, industry, occupation, time and geographic controls. They do not vary by union status, public-private sector attachment, pay method or age; nor do they arise from the effects of equal-employment enforcement or geographic differences in racial/ethnic representation. The findings imply that measures of the adjusted wage disadvantages of minority employees are overstated by about 10 percent.

 

That would be nice but it would draw attention to it. I suspect there would be a lot of pressure to sweep it away from public view.

Yep, February. Cold enough for the right wing rags to make a pass at climate change.

 

Yep, February. Cold enough for the right wing rags to make a pass at climate change.

So your in favor of continuing funding for people to assert things that may not be true, to the extent of their claims.

Maybe federal funding would be put to better use by betting on sporting events.