30 Senate Dems plan all-nighter discussing climate change. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 09:22:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  30 Senate Dems plan all-nighter discussing climate change. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 30 Senate Dems plan all-nighter discussing climate change.  (Read 2640 times)
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« on: March 10, 2014, 07:15:18 PM »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/senate-overnight-climate-change_n_4937078.html
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2014, 09:25:50 PM »

Thomas Jefferson: I did not delete my post. I assume it was deleted by a mod. I won't contest it. I will ask a question to CTRattlesnake
Do you know that scientists first identified CO2, CH4, and N2O as greenhouse gases a century ago, before any talk of global warming was around? And do you you deny that greenhouse gases have been increasing in the atmosphere, as a direct result of human industrial activity? This is not a hard concept to grasp...
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2014, 11:38:27 PM »

I respectfully disagree. At the very least, they need to expose the misinformation. That's actually what they're doing right now- mostly it's been "look at what's happened, here's the evidence". A few senators mentioned cap-and-trade, but most specific policies have been along the lines of fuel efficiency standards and renewable energy/natural gas investment. I'm hearing Shaheen-Portman touted a lot so far. None of the policies they are seriously talking about I feel could be mildly controversial, and again, most of the time they are talking about the evidence of what is happening in their own states.

My own favorite was, surprisingly, Senator King's (I-ME) speech. He did a great job connecting the dots on economic, environmental, security, moral, reasons, to take action.
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2014, 11:54:51 PM »

I never heard that talking point when Rand Paul and others filibustered on drones and the NSA.

I think the method in the madness is to make it a more visible issue so they can capitalize on it later. Otherwise I don't think 29 senators would be doing it. More like 5. We'll just have to see though.
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2014, 12:13:45 AM »

Sigh... I'm just going to repeat a previous quote.
Do you know that scientists first identified CO2, CH4, and N2O as greenhouse gases a century ago, before any talk of global warming was around? And do you you deny that greenhouse gases have been increasing in the atmosphere, as a direct result of human industrial activity? This is not a hard concept to grasp...
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2014, 01:34:53 PM »


Hey butafly, thats not the way science works and there are plenty of dissenters, please don't cherry pick data.

“In the sciences, the authority of thousands of opinions is not worth as much as one tiny spark of reason in an individual man.”
― Galileo Galilei



Hey CTRattlesnake, the 9136 sparks of reason from 9136 reasonable person outweighs the one tiny "authoritative opinion".

And yes, that is the way science works.
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2014, 02:54:37 PM »

You seem to neglect two very strong positive feedback systems: the release of methane from previously frozen permafrost, and the decreased albedo effect caused by shrinking ice coverage.

By acting to trap energy, these molecules increase the average kinetic energy of the system, aka of the temperature of the atmosphere.
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2014, 06:58:30 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

And yet you accuse the other side of "religious zealotry"...

I'm pretty sure I have just as much obsession re: this topic as you.

Your explanation about the CO2 escaping is intriguing, but at the very least, incomplete. For example, any poleward movement would be met by a (relative) loss of heat, that would cause it to drop back down .
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2014, 09:31:33 PM »

Regarding your convection theory- all that does is lead to a more efficient heating of the entire planet, such that cool, polar areas will get warmer summers. since glacial cover is closely dependent with summer temperature, this also predicates decline of glacial cover in the Arctic, worsening the albedo problem.

Do you have any evidence that the next solar maximum is expected to be deeper than, say, the Dalton Minimum?

I find your comment about environmentalists caring about climate change to the exclusion of everything else fairly ridiculous. I have not met an environmentalist who did not care about acid rain, biodiversity loss, deforestation, water pollution, coral reef destruction, and other issues not entwined with climate change.

Just curious, but have you heard of the Milankovitch Cycle?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 10 queries.