Those enviro-nutties are at it again!
- Thread starter truby20
- Start date
Now you did it.
StanleyRugg
New Member
I was thinkin more along the lines of "fart arresters". I was out in the inventin hut just workin on it. I have a couple a ideas and not sure which one to use. First I was thinkin a charcoal activated canister that would trap the methane. But now I am thinkin a small combustion chamber with a pizeoelectric igniter that would catch a fart, then ignite it and vent the flame out a tube. I have about 100 ignites I got at an auction that came from Sears gas grills.vraiblonde said:There totally needs to be a law against cow farts
Last edited:
Yeah, just not FT.MMDad said:
That is why you don't go outside much and if you do you have on fat boy pants, bunny boots (air insulated), parka with the fur tunnel hood, and those clumsy (but very warm) gauntlets.Mikeinsmd said:
Yep, once the winds get about/above hurricane strength the windchill impact starts having less of an effect (but I don't think there is a large enough wind to make it feel warmer then the ambient air).Also when you get to those extreme temps. there is a point where the wind chill actually makes the temp. feel warmer.
Do you concur Stan??
Vince
......
Wore all that stuff and my quiltees. Only gloves I ever wore were my flight gloves and no gloves. Learned my lesson when I got some frostbite on my left hand. Saw a friend of mine with frost bite on his ears and he didn't even know it until I pointed out that he looked like dumbo. His ears were swollen up big time. And of course when they start to thaw.....pain.Ken King said:
Quiltees, they were the best and warmest item you could have in the cold. Kept those body parts Kwillia was talking about from even thinking about falling off.Vince said:Wore all that stuff and my quiltees. Only gloves I ever wore were my flight gloves and no gloves. Learned my lesson when I got some frostbite on my left hand. Saw a friend of mine with frost bite on his ears and he didn't even know it until I pointed out that he looked like dumbo. His ears were swollen up big time. And of course when they start to thaw.....pain.
sleuth
Livin' Like Thanksgivin'
Recently read "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton. Very good book.
In the appendix, he gives his views based on his research that he did for the writing of the book. Basically, his premise is that we still don't understand climate patterns and predicting long-term weather patterns is accurate to within 400% at best. He rightly states that 400% isn't exactly an acceptable scientific margin.
He proposes that politics and government intervention is bad, except in cases where it's obvious that the effects of some toxic substance is injuring humans or wildlife. He makes an excellent point that we don't even know how to preserve wildlife, and that our national parks are prime examples of this. Everytime someone tries to restore a balance to something (e.g. too few deer, too many bears, etc.), the end result is that some other entity within the eco system is damaged. For example, deer are overpopulated, we wipe out deer, but then something that the deer ate ends up spiraling out of control, etc.). He makes the point that man has been shaping the world around him since he first appeared, and what makes today any different?
He proposes that environmental groups should have a lifespan of about 50 years, before disbanding and starting new groups, because after a few decades, they get too political. One of the characters in his book decides to form a new environmental organization, called "Study the Problem and Fix It," saying that there aren't any environmental groups today that actually do just that.
Very good book. I recommend it to anyone who likes action, mystery, suspense, or conspiracy. I equate it to the style of a Clive Cussler novel and/or a Tom Clancy novel.
In the appendix, he gives his views based on his research that he did for the writing of the book. Basically, his premise is that we still don't understand climate patterns and predicting long-term weather patterns is accurate to within 400% at best. He rightly states that 400% isn't exactly an acceptable scientific margin.
He proposes that politics and government intervention is bad, except in cases where it's obvious that the effects of some toxic substance is injuring humans or wildlife. He makes an excellent point that we don't even know how to preserve wildlife, and that our national parks are prime examples of this. Everytime someone tries to restore a balance to something (e.g. too few deer, too many bears, etc.), the end result is that some other entity within the eco system is damaged. For example, deer are overpopulated, we wipe out deer, but then something that the deer ate ends up spiraling out of control, etc.). He makes the point that man has been shaping the world around him since he first appeared, and what makes today any different?
He proposes that environmental groups should have a lifespan of about 50 years, before disbanding and starting new groups, because after a few decades, they get too political. One of the characters in his book decides to form a new environmental organization, called "Study the Problem and Fix It," saying that there aren't any environmental groups today that actually do just that.
Very good book. I recommend it to anyone who likes action, mystery, suspense, or conspiracy. I equate it to the style of a Clive Cussler novel and/or a Tom Clancy novel.
Actually what he appears to be saying is that human activity is pushing it OUT of its 'normal' fluctuation cycle - that within its own patterns, our activity is either accelerating normal climatic change, or perturbing it more than would be normal for it to do on its own. Whether you agree with it or not, he doesn't seem to be contradicting himself.Lenny said:
truby20
Fighting like a girl
You are exactly right, I'm confused as to what Lenny is talking about.SamSpade said:
and just to be clear my original post was dripping with sarcasm...Richard Alley is a very respected climate researcher from a university with an amazing atmopheric science program...he is no "enviro-scientist-nutto".
truby20
Fighting like a girl
What about it makes it a stupid quote? In the first quote he is referring to the time before the Industrial Revolution and the second quote he is referring to the most recent measurements.ylexot said:
Here is a plot so you can "see what is going on". I pulled it from this article on RealClimate.
(the top graph is CO2 concentration over time (in years thousands past), the bottom is the rate of change of deuterium measurements from Vostok and EPICA Dome C (I got that from the article, I've never seen deuterium measurements used before but my experience in ice core samples is lacking))
You're right they should have included a graph showing this correlation, I don't know why they didn't. Of course it will be included in the final study but I wish they included something with the original article.ylexot said:
Last edited:
They're all enviro-scientist-nuttos - with their hands out for grant money. Think that might make 'em more prone to "discover" whatever will make 'em the most buckage?truby20 said:
Honestly, I never used to be this cynical until the internet. I was pretty happy just moseying along, thinking science was pure and there was no agenda. Then I started reading about how these researchers skew data to make it more interesting or seem like they're making a breakthrough.
We've been dealing with AIDS for 25 years now and every single year, some money grubber cons the press into reporting a breakthrough, only to never have it pan out once they get their palms greased.
These global warming screwballs are the same way. They get the Hollywood elite to champion their cause and raise funds for them, then said celebrity hops in their Mercedes SUV and drives up to their 10,000 sq. ft. mansion so they can set their automatic watering system before they fire up the private luxury airplane for some R&R in Barbados.
The whole thing is a scam.
truby20
Fighting like a girl
sleuth said:
Well I'm not sure how reducing CO2 emissions would damage some other entity in the eco system...other than what we develop that replaces the combustion engine. I guess waste from used batteries would have to be taken care of if we all went to hybrids...
But just because our solution may damage the environment that isn't a reason to stop progress. We have to make steps in reducing our footprint no matter how small incremental steps are.
ylexot
Super Genius
No, that's not what it says in the first quote. The first quote says that the highest CO2 levels that they were able to determine were right before the Industrial Revolution.truby20 said:
Now I know why they don't show these plots normally...their conclusions are unfounded as far as I can tell. Looks to me like there's a spike every 100,000 years or so and we're actually past-due for one.truby20 said:
Did you read what you just wrote?truby20 said:
truby20
Fighting like a girl
The data from the ice core does not clearly indicate the last 100 years since the axis covers 650k years.ylexot said:
This graph of CO2 readings from Mauna Loa shows that the current level of CO2 is at ~365ppm, that's much above the 300ppm spikes shown in the earlier graph. Manua Loa is considered as one of the best datasets we have of CO2 levels for the post Industrial Revolution time period.