Pagina de start
www.oltcit.ro (Oltcit, Dacia, ARO)
 
 Întrebări frecvente   Căutare   Membri   Grupuri   Înregistrare 
 Regulament   Profil   Mesaje private   Autentificare 

incalzirea globala & poluare [split]
Pagina Anterioară  1, 2
 
Crează un topic nou, separat de acest topic   Răspunde la mesajele din acest topic    Pagina de start -> Cafenea
Subiectul anterior :: Subiectul următor  
Mesaj
iuliu marinescu - Oricat te-ai straduii tu sa ne convingi de ceva anume un lucru e cert:

talash a scris:... oricum nu avem noi informatiile necesare pentru a ajunge la o concluzie reala...


Poti sa citesti sute de texte pe nu stiu ce site-uri, Wolf poate sa vina si el cu tot atatea texte pantru ca e degeaba: Stiu , asta crezi tu, asta e convingerea ta, am inteles, am priceput dar lasa-ne pe noi sa credem ce vrem.
La cat de mult insisti pe tema asta mie unul mi se pare suspect.
daniel.opr a scris:iuliu marinescu - Oricat te-ai straduii tu sa ne convingi de ceva anume un lucru e cert:

talash a scris:... oricum nu avem noi informatiile necesare pentru a ajunge la o concluzie reala...


Poti sa citesti sute de texte pe nu stiu ce site-uri, Wolf poate sa vina si el cu tot atatea texte pantru ca e degeaba: Stiu , asta crezi tu, asta e convingerea ta, am inteles, am priceput dar lasa-ne pe noi sa credem ce vrem.
La cat de mult insisti pe tema asta mie unul mi se pare suspect.

Oricate argumente as aduce eu in sprijinul afirmatiilor mele, @talash are dreptate neconditionat?!?De ce?Poti explica?
Argumentele mele sau ale lui MadWolf sunt "degeaba" in fata judecatii Domniei Voastre "dreapta si inteleapta"?Asa, si?
V-a impiedicat cineva sa "credeti ce vreti"?!?Domnia Voastra nu-si "modeleaza" opiniile, punctele de vedere in functie de informatiile argumentate pe care le acumuleaza cu privire la un subiect aflat in discutie ori altul?
Ce anume, si mai ales de ce, vi se pare "suspect"?Puteti detalia?


Multumesc! http://www.evz.ro/articole/detalii-articol/887162/SENATUL-EVZ-Cum-ati-petrecut-de-incalzirea-globala/ A mai fost difuzat o data...
Pe Antena 3...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6026880749850611241#
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6026880749850611241#docid=8572626628002198226
Interesant? Eh,ii mai arde cuiva de "gogoasa"globala?V-ati lamurit? Buna ziua, este primul post al meu, deci salut!
Mai, sa nu uitam ca cei din mass-media care se pronunta puternic impotriva faptului ca incalzirea globala este cauzata principal de umanitate, primesc de obicei niste donatii foarte generoase din surse anonime(gen companii petroliere).

Ca sa zici ca industria asta care se bazeaza in principal pe carbune si petrol, cauzeaza o schimbare care va pune in pericol umanitatea este ceva foarte daunator la opinia publicului fata de companiile astea. Nu ca le doare pe ele de public, insa opinia publicului poate sa afecteze si opinia si decizia liderilor de stat.

Incalzirea asta globulara este si naturala, insa de data asta este mult mai grava, deoarece cantitatile enorme de carbon care erau normal in pamant, sunt acum in atmosfera, pastrand o gramada de caldura de la soare. Aiurea..."Cantitatile enorme" sunt de fapt insignifiante in contextul entropiei globale.Fara cifre se poate debita orice enormitate.... Indiferent de poluare, lumea are nevoie de energie, si pana acum am fost in stare s-o scoatem doar din petrol si carbune, as aca-i dam inainte cu ce avem.
Este foarte posibil sa ne curatam toti, insa care ar fi problema? Speciile au venit, s-au dus, milioane de ani ua trecut, noi sintem o specie tanara, o sa disparem, vor trece alte milioane de ani, planeta isi va schimba relieful, orbita, Soarele se va stinge.
Evident ca mai exista si cretinii religiosi care isi inchipuie ca undeva exista un nene numit Dumnezeu, si totul face parte din planul sau, cu omenirea fiind buricul Universului, Dumnezeu a creat planetele acum miliarde de ani, s-a distrat cu protozoarele, meduzele, dinozaurii, apoi si-a dat seama ca lipsea omul, l-a creat pe om, caruia i-a daruit pasiunea pentru mecanica auto si pentru muzica, si de atunci a urmarit cu ochi tolarenti cum se aduna credinciosii si necredinciosii la Poarta Raiului. E mai cald in nord , pana la urma ? Se topeste gheata si vom avea mai multa apa in lume?!? Muuult mai cald...Pai frigul a venit la noi....
Mai motane...nu mai scosesi furtunu' ala...Vezi cum esti? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZOI7GKaeFY
No comment... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtWIzMY7Dqs&feature=player_embedded
Eh, mai e cineva "incalzit global" pe-aici?
V-ati lamurit cum sta treaba?
Mai aveti putin si schiati si-n mai?
Vreti si in iunie?
Ar trebui sa ne fie frica, mai degraba, de venirea unei noi glaciatiuni?
Acum are sens ce spuneam eu, acum ceva vreme?
Multumesc! Deci, nimeni...
Am banuit eu... Era o vorba... "Daca taceai, filozof ramaneai". Cu un asa ministru bun ...care va scoate din circulatie ultimile masini romanesti predecembriste .... pamantul nu se va mai incalzi asa de tare ...cel putin deasupra romaniei !
asta cu incalzirea globala ... se numeste manipularea maselor de oameni ... carora daca le picuri in fiecare zi cam cum e mediul inconjurator, cam ce inseamna sa mananci natural, cam cum ar trebui sa traiesti ... atunci, dupa 20 de ani incepi sa crezi ca asa e cel mai bine !
adevarul este ceva relativ ... raportat la un tipar, care de multe ori e gresit, dar ne induce o senzatie de bine !
Deci concluzia mea e ca incalzirea globala e o facatura... cand si-au dat seama de faptul ca temperatura ar trebui sa ajunga la anumite valori in ceva ani, valori pe care nu aveam cum sa le atingem ....atunci au zis ca ne incalzim mai incet "din 1995 planeta nu se mai incalzeste asa tare, pentru ca iata ...am inventat standardul 14001"... aberez ...dar cam asa suntem indoctrinati ! Edi... fara suparare... se incalzeste. Faza 1: "Nu-i adevarat, nu se incalzeste". Faza 2, soptit: "Bah, cum pana mea s-o mai dam cotita, e evident ca se-ncalzeste" Si cu voce tare: "OK, se-ncalzeste, da' in nici un caz nu suntem noi de vina!". Ba suntem, si ma pipi pe standardele lor si pe ISO-urile lor si pe reglementarile lor de cacao care doar muta poluarea de la toba de esapament a masinii la cosul fabricii... si mai baga niste banuti in buzunarele smecherilor care fac ISO-urile. Ar trebui o schimbare de mentalitate mult prea profunda, si suntem cam multi pe planeta asta ca sa mai tinem lucrurile sub control. Cel mai bine o sa se simta ca suntem prea multi cand o sa se termine petrolul si gazele naturale si vom vedea ca trebuie sa cultivam rapita pe jumatate din suprafata planetei ca sa intretinem macar 10 - 15% din populatie la standardele actuale... nasol moment o sa fie.

P.S. Parerea mea... [quote]Edi... fara suparare... se incalzeste. Faza 1: "Nu-i adevarat, nu se incalzeste". Faza 2, soptit: "Bah, cum pana mea s-o mai dam cotita, e evident ca se-ncalzeste" Si cu voce tare: "OK, se-ncalzeste, da' in nici un caz nu suntem noi de vina!". Ba suntem, si ma pipi pe standardele lor si pe ISO-urile lor si pe reglementarile lor de cacao care doar muta poluarea de la toba de esapament a masinii la cosul fabricii...[/quote]
Numai "bla-bla-bla" total neargumentat, din "rarunchi frustrati eco"...
[quote]Era o vorba... "Daca taceai, filozof ramaneai".[/quote]
Multumesc, la fel!
[quote]P.S.Parerea mea...[/quote]
Era binecunoscuta. Puteai sa nu te mai obosesti s-o mai reiterezi.
Oricum nu ti-o mai impartaseste mai nimeni.
Bafta! eu nu citesc din carti ... ci analizez dupa ceea ce am simtit eu ca om ...locuitor al acestei planete ... ei zic ca se incalzeste planeta cu 0.6...sau 0.7 grade pe an ... total fals ... ! in 33 de ani de cand ma aflu ...planeta trebuia sa fie cu 20 grade mai calda decat la inceputurile mele ... dar temperaturi de 40 vara erau si pe vremea acelor ani ...si la fel si acum ...nu cred ca s-a inregistrat in romania temperaturi de 60 de grade ! .. si facand un calcul simplu nu cred ca peste 120 de ani vom fierbe la soare (si vei veni cu contraargumentul ca odata cu incalzirea se produce glaciatiunea din cauza topirii ghetarilor in curentii calzi ai planetei si racesc coastele continentelor) ... teoriile sunt teorii ... putem sa ne dam cu parerea mult si bine ... cercetari se fac ...pentru ca trebuie sa ne gasim o ocupatie ... suntem in era in care muncim foarte putin fizic ...nu mai facem piramide cu carca ! si astfel stam intr-un laborator in care nu vedem decat foarte rar lumina zilei si facem niste teorii demonstrate altora ...care de asemeni nu au ce face ... si apoi dau stirea la o televiziune contra unei sume modice ... si brusc planeta se incalzeste ! atunci noi ...vanzatorii de petrol si gaze naturale ... infiintam niste legi...standarde ...cum vrem sa le numim... si le aplicam marilor poluatori ...care suntem tot noi ... adica ne dam amenzi noua ... e ca si cum am lua din buzunar banii si i-am pune in portofel ... dar ... si micilor poluatori ... ca din cauza tuturor planeta se incalzeste ... si asa ca in portofel ...pe langa banii din buzunar ...mai bagam si din buzunarele altora ! de ce ? ca sa protejam planeta !
Sunt mecanisme la nivel mare ..despre care noi nu trebuie sa stim ! si suntem inserati de mici cu adevaruri ... si cu teorii spuse ...foarte credibile ... incat mari chiar ne dorim ca ele sa fie intocmai...si ne luptam sa le mentinem... de ce ? suntem aia care nu conteaza !
zici ca suntem multi pe planeta ... iar fals ! suntem aglomerati in locuri "civilizate" atata tot! de asemeni suprapopularea asta artificiala este mediatizata din motive economice ... "nu ai unde sa mai stai ...esti in plus ... sau daca vrei sa stai aici ...uite asta costa de 100 de ori mai mult decat ar costa in alte conditii ... si ti-l dau tie ...numai ca sa ai loc" si asa se imbogatesc unii !
deci ... din punctul meu de vedere sunt teorii nefondate ...pentru ca noi sa "constientizam" pericolul ....si 90% din populatie daca le cred ...ei si-au atins targetul !
offtopic vis a vis de treaba cu suprapopularea: eu stau in ploiesti si acum vreo 4 ani m-am decis sa imi iau casa langa oras ...la o distanta de maxim 20 km ... si am gasit la vremea respectiva cu 280mil 1600mp cu casa batraneasca locuibila ... la 18 km de ploiesti... boon si la aceeasi distanta de 18 km in partea opusa casele costau cu un petic de pamant de pana in 300 mp tot cu casa batraneasca undeva la 70000 de euro (echivalentul a 2,3 miliarde de lei) si nu intelegeam de ce asa mare diferenta ! si recomandand si altor prieteni satul meu de batrani ... am avut revelatia sa aflu de ce costa asa mult in zona opusa ! "este la DN...alte conditii, alte facilitati! " unde vroiam sa ajung ... au fostunii cu bani careau luat terenuri langa DN cu nimic ... si-au facut 2-3 case mai rasarite ... si si-au vandut si altor prieteni terenuri de la ei ...si a aparut un grup de cateva case mai rasarite ... au scos textul mai sus zis cu "e DN alte conditii " si i-au facut pe foarte multi sa isi doreasca asa ceva ! si cand iti doresti ...deja nu mai conteaza costurile ... iar daca devi " in plus" ...mai sus amintit ... atunci incepi sa platesti pe aia cu bani sa iti dea si tie o bucata dintr-un teren care nu valoreaza deloc atat ! omgomgomg
iuliu marinescu a scris:Numai "bla-bla-bla" total neargumentat, din "rarunchi frustrati eco"...


Probabil asa-i... cand te incapatanezi sa negi evidenta, anume ca temperatura din zilele astea e cu vreo 10-12 grade peste media multianuala, probabil ca eu sunt cel frustrat iar tu ai un comportament perfect normal...

Edi, temperatura medie (si subliniez, medie) a crescut cu 1.33 grade in ultimul secol, nu stiu de unde ai scos tu aia cu 0.6 - 0.7 grade pe an... doar ca de cand cu revolutia industriala temperatura a crescut mult mai repede decat spun indicatori din stratele de roci (stratigrafia bat-o vina, Facultatea de Geologie, anul 2!), mult mai repede decat in perioadele in care s-au format stratele de carbuni (cursul de Carbuni, anul 4, bata-l vina...) si mult mai repede decat spun datarile facute pe ghetari fosili - unul din studii facut de o colega de club, Ana-Voica Bojar, impreuna cu alti colaboratori, pe ghetarul de la Scarisoara... un abstract ar fi aici... http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2010JD014477.shtml - am si articolul complet, mi l-a trimis pe mail.

Dar, bineinteles, "nu-i adevarat"... iar eu sunt doar un frustrat. Iar domnul care imi arunca asemenea epitete mai sus are argumente solide furnizate de Universitatea Crestina Cucuietii din Deal, nu de Universitatea din Salzburg unde s-au pripasit niste neica nimeni... [quote]Probabil asa-i... cand te incapatanezi sa negi evidenta, anume ca temperatura din zilele astea e cu vreo 10-12 grade peste media multianuala, probabil ca eu sunt cel frustrat iar tu ai un comportament perfect normal... [/quote]
Temperatura din zilele astea este un rezultat al circulatiei aerului nu a cresterii concentratiei de CO2, a carei legatura cu incalzirea globala nu a facut-o inca nimeni indubitabil.
Iar acele studii aride despre roci, in care intra-adevar nu sunt specialist, si despre care tu nu comentezi si nu interpretezi nimic, nu-ti dau dreptul sa iti "umfli" atat de tare pieptul cu studiile tale universitare, care sunt tot atat de universitare cat ale mele, dar in alt domeniu.
Esti atat de plin de tine incat esti foarte putin preocupat de a aduce argumente pertinente si interpretate "de-a gata", ca pentru niste "neofiti", nu neaparat pentru mine, ci pentru ceilalti colegi de forum, incat jignesti in dreapta si-n stanga. Promit sa revin cu "adversari" pe masura "studiilor prea inalte si atat de mult trambitate" ale Domniei Voastre.
Temperaturile din primavara asta, "istoric" de reduse, care au dus , practic, la schimbarea paradigmei. te-au facut sa taci chitic, si ai revenit acum pe fondul toamnei acesteia superbe, ca in adolescenta (mea).
Patetic!

Sa fii iubit! De asta nu mai puteti trai voi linistiti fiindca afara se incalzeste sau se raceste. Om trai si om vedea. Exista metode de a ne asigura confortul termic. AdiCA CUM zicea comicul ala(nu mai stiu cum ii spune, l-ati pus voi pe aici pe undeva):
"the planet is fine, WE ARE FUCKED" George Carlin ii zice. [quote="MadWolf"][quote="iuliu marinescu"]Numai "bla-bla-bla" total neargumentat, din "rarunchi frustrati eco"...[/quote]

Probabil asa-i... cand te incapatanezi sa negi evidenta, anume ca temperatura din zilele astea e cu vreo 10-12 grade peste media multianuala, probabil ca eu sunt cel frustrat iar tu ai un comportament perfect normal...

Edi, temperatura medie (si subliniez, [b]medie[/b]) a crescut cu 1.33 grade in ultimul secol, nu stiu de unde ai scos tu aia cu 0.6 - 0.7 grade pe an... doar ca de cand cu revolutia industriala temperatura a crescut mult mai repede decat spun indicatori din stratele de roci (stratigrafia bat-o vina, Facultatea de Geologie, anul 2!), mult mai repede decat in perioadele in care s-au format stratele de carbuni (cursul de Carbuni, anul 4, bata-l vina...) si mult mai repede decat spun datarile facute pe ghetari fosili - unul din studii facut de o colega de club, Ana-Voica Bojar, impreuna cu alti colaboratori, pe ghetarul de la Scarisoara... un abstract ar fi aici... http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2010JD014477.shtml - am si articolul complet, mi l-a trimis pe mail.

Dar, bineinteles, "nu-i adevarat"... iar eu sunt doar un frustrat. Iar domnul care imi arunca asemenea epitete mai sus are argumente solide furnizate de Universitatea Crestina Cucuietii din Deal, nu de Universitatea din Salzburg unde s-au pripasit niste neica nimeni...[/quote]
Nu inteleg ce cauta ghetarul de la Scarisoara intr-un studiu despre incalzirea globala.
Scarisoara este o pestera unde temperatura este constanta indiferent de temperatura de afara.
Daca temperatura din Scarisoara ar fluctua dupa temperatura de afara, ghetarul s-ar topi in cursul verii si si-ar reveni in timpul iernii, ceea ce nu se intampla.
Poti posta pe forum acest studiu, intru lamurirea generala a situatiei?
Multumesc! De duminica, 9 octombrie, scad temperaturile sub media multianuala.
Iar nu-l mai "auzim" vreun an , asa, pe Madwolf...
Revine el, cand mai e vreun curent de aer cald de pe undeva, sa ne spuna cum se "incalzeste".
La intrebarea mea din postul anterior nici macar nu se sinchiseste sa raspunda.
Iata-l si pe dr. Hansen:
http://www.thehotjoints.com/2009/01/28/global-warming-alarmist-james-hansens-former-nasa-supervisor-calls-him-an-embarrassment/
Pareri? S-au sucit!
Iata "ultimele vesti":
"Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html

By David Rose

Last updated at 5:38 AM on 29th January 2012
The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.
The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.
A painting, dated 1684, by Abraham Hondius depicts one of many frost fairs on the River Thames during the mini ice age
Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.
Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.
We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.
Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona – derived from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s surface – suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a great deal weaker still.
More...
Hotter summers 'may kill 5,900 every year', warns first national risk assessment of climate change
Winter bites back: Britain braced for first cold snap of year as ice and snow transform countryside in scenes of breathtaking beauty
What are the mysterious blue balls that fell from the sky over Bournemouth?
According to a paper issued last week by the Met Office, there is a 92 per cent chance that both Cycle 25 and those taking place in the following decades will be as weak as, or weaker than, the ‘Dalton minimum’ of 1790 to 1830. In this period, named after the meteorologist John Dalton, average temperatures in parts of Europe fell by 2C.
However, it is also possible that the new solar energy slump could be as deep as the ‘Maunder minimum’ (after astronomer Edward Maunder), between 1645 and 1715 in the coldest part of the ‘Little Ice Age’ when, as well as the Thames frost fairs, the canals of Holland froze solid. The world average temperature from 1997 to 2012
Yet, in its paper, the Met Office claimed that the consequences now would be negligible – because the impact of the sun on climate is far less than man-made carbon dioxide. Although the sun’s output is likely to decrease until 2100, ‘This would only cause a reduction in global temperatures of 0.08C.’ Peter Stott, one of the authors, said: ‘Our findings suggest a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in hundreds of years would be insufficient to offset the dominant influence of greenhouse gases.’
These findings are fiercely disputed by other solar experts.
World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or more,’ said Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at Denmark’s National Space Institute. ‘It will take a long battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important. It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own, without the need for their help.’
He pointed out that, in claiming the effect of the solar minimum would be small, the Met Office was relying on the same computer models that are being undermined by the current pause in global-warming.
CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption and, in 2007, the Met Office claimed that global warming was about to ‘come roaring back’. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an overall increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in 1998.
World solar activity cycles from 1749 to 2040
So far there is no sign of any of this happening. But yesterday a Met Office spokesman insisted its models were still valid.
‘The ten-year projection remains groundbreaking science. The period for the original projection is not over yet,’ he said.
Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show there should have been ‘steady warming from 2000 until now’.
‘If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories,’ he said.
He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that there would not be cooling. ‘The real issue is whether the model itself is accurate,’ Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America’s most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, said she found the Met Office’s confident prediction of a ‘negligible’ impact difficult to understand.
‘The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of the sun,’ said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said that many scientists ‘are not surprised’
Four hundred years of sunspot observations
She argued it is becoming evident that factors other than CO2 play an important role in rising or falling warmth, such as the 60-year water temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.
‘They have insufficiently been appreciated in terms of global climate,’ said Prof Curry. When both oceans were cold in the past, such as from 1940 to 1970, the climate cooled. The Pacific cycle ‘flipped’ back from warm to cold mode in 2008 and the Atlantic is also thought likely to flip in the next few years .
Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some scientists found the importance of water cycles difficult to accept, because doing so means admitting that the oceans – not CO2 – caused much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997.
The same goes for the impact of the sun – which was highly active for much of the 20th Century.
‘Nature is about to carry out a very interesting experiment,’ he said. ‘Ten or 15 years from now, we will be able to determine much better whether the warming of the late 20th Century really was caused by man-made CO2, or by natural variability.’
Meanwhile, since the end of last year, world temperatures have fallen by more than half a degree, as the cold ‘La Nina’ effect has re-emerged in the South Pacific.
‘We’re now well into the second decade of the pause,’ said Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. ‘If we don’t see convincing evidence of global warming by 2015, it will start to become clear whether the models are bunk. And, if they are, the implications for some scientists could be very serious.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html#ixzz1l3WHqdmo"

Lectura placuta!
Facultatea de Geologie, anul 2!), mult mai repede decat in perioadele in care s-au format stratele de carbuni (cursul de Carbuni, anul 4, bata-l vina...) si mult mai repede decat spun datarile facute pe ghetari fosili - unul din studii facut de o colega de club, Ana-Voica Bojar

Ce mai zice "colega Ana-Voica Bojar"?
Cum ii mai "da" studiul ghetarilor fosili? In loc sa scoata si ea "un ban cinstit" din fonduri guvernamentale ecomafiote cum fac colegii ei de mai la vest, incearca sa "aduca spuza pe turta" Domniei Sale aducand rezultatele asa-zisei cercetari pe taramul propriilor convingeri? Nimic mai periculos! Activism, intoxicare si militantism gaunos, din convingere nu din interes. Periculos dar tipic...
Cum e cu anul 4? Dar cu anul 2? Dar cu 22?Stratigrafia ?Carbunii? Ce mai "zice" ei?
Ridicol! http://www.ziare.com/europa/italia/o-furtuna-de-zapada-la-roma-inchide-colosseumul-1148830 http://www.bursa.ro/?s=companii_afaceri&articol=193312 Mare-i gradina lui Dumnezeu... nici in zi de Craciun n-ai liniste?!? La voi , cei mai "destepti dintre savanti", Craciunul cade pe 26 decembrie?
Crezi ca faptul ca am postat un link aici semnifica faptul ca n-am liniste?
Nu esti inca suficient de convins ca ajunge cat te-ai facut de ras pana acum? Continui sa participi(si inca pe un ton sarcastic), la discutia asta?
Cam care or fi dimensiunile ridicolului la care pana si constiinta ta iti semnalizeaza sa te opresti?
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:rqQOIJaq-HkJ:www.uni-graz.at/richard.parncutt/climatechange.html+&cd=1&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de
iuliu marinescu a scris:La voi , cei mai "destepti dintre savanti", Craciunul cade pe 26 decembrie?


Pentru informarea ta, Craciunul si Pastele sunt sarbatori care au fiecare cate 3 zile. Asa spune biserica ortodoxa, nu spun eu.

iuliu marinescu a scris:Crezi ca faptul ca am postat un link aici semnifica faptul ca n-am liniste?


Exact. Te racaie faptul ca vrei sa demonstrezi cu orice pret ca tu ai dreptate. Ca esti detinatorul adevarului absolut. Si ca toti ceilalti sunt praf. Ti-au mai spus asta si altii mai sus in acest topic.

Calin Rechea este economist, dupa cum am gasit pe Google. Cam cat de calificat este un economist (care scrie articole pentru "Bursa") sa emita opinii despre incalzirea/racirea globala? Alec Rowls, a carui opinie o preia, este tot economist (http://www.blogger.com/profile/18106800937399442588), ti se pare autorizat sa isi dea cu parerea?

iuliu marinescu a scris:Nu esti inca suficient de convins ca ajunge cat te-ai facut de ras pana acum? Continui sa participi(si inca pe un ton sarcastic), la discutia asta?
Cam care or fi dimensiunile ridicolului la care pana si constiinta ta iti semnalizeaza sa te opresti?


Pasajul de mai sus are un ton cel putin necivilizat. Ca si cel cu "cei mai destepti dintre savanti". Am rugamintea ca un moderator sau poate administratorul sa ia masurile pe care le considera. Multumesc. ce discutii interesante ....... [quote]Pentru informarea ta, Craciunul si Pastele sunt sarbatori care au fiecare cate 3 zile. Asa spune biserica ortodoxa, nu spun eu.[/quote]
Credeam ca te referi la sarbatoarea propriu-zisa nu la "a-n-a zi de...".
In fine, din punctul asta de vedere s-ar putea spune ca ai dreptate...

[quote]Exact. Te racaie faptul ca vrei sa demonstrezi cu orice pret ca tu ai dreptate. Ca esti detinatorul adevarului absolut. Si ca toti ceilalti sunt praf. Ti-au mai spus asta si altii mai sus in acest topic. [/quote]
Draga MadWolf postul care il precede pe cel din 26 decembrie este din februarie a.c. Asta demonstreaza ca ma intereseaza foarte tare sa "am dreptate" cu orice pret in fata unor oameni ca tine?
Majoritatea celor care au mai postat aici au fost in opozitie cu tine/parerea ta, daca nu ma insel. Reciteste...
Cand intrebarile au atins probleme pertinente despre inadvertente logice observabile si de catre un neofit, ai tacut chitic. De ce oare?
Baiatul acela, economistul, nu face decat sa alcatuiasca o constructie logica pe baza datelor pe care le are la dispozitie. Putea fi matematician, fizician, inginer sau orice altceva. Sau in "turnul vostru de fildes", voi "cei alesi" puteti trage concluzii care sa sfideze logica formala, fara a va teme ca veti cadea in ridicol?!?
Inainte de a judeca despre "ascutimea" tonului meu mai bine ti-ai masura cuvintele care "pleaca" cumva de pe o pozitie, nu stiu de ce, mai "inalta", si nu "sufera" deloc de vreun iz de "condescendenta sfatoasa" a connaisseurului fata de un "amarat de" neofit ci mai degraba de o superioritate gaunoasa afisata doar, insa nesustinuta cu argumente pertinente care sa alunge orice umbra de indoiala. "Stiinta" deformata de convingeri personale in scopul de a aduce o ipoteza sau alta in lumina speculatiilor cu o anume tenta. Si anume "finantabila"...
Pacat si rusine! Bun, se vede treaba ca forumul asta-i sat fara caini. Au mai sesizat si altii aspectul.

iuliu marinescu a scris:http://ro.altermedia.info/noua-ordine-mondiala/apostolul-incalzirii-globale-escroc-de-talie-internationala_18511.html

Ai vreo idee cine este Dragos Paul Aligica? Hai sa-ti spun eu: doctor in stiinte politice. Adica unu' de-ala care are impresia ca e dator sa emita cate o opinie referitor la orice. Cauta-l pe Google. Despre Rajendra Pachauri, aici: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri - poti sa verfici eventual ca Daily Telegraph i-a cerut scuze. Dar e si asta o strategie de dezinformare, publici un articol de scandal si dupa aia publici niste scuze pe care lumea le citeste pe sarite.

iuliu marinescu a scris:http://interceptor.wordpress.com/2009/12/24/goldman-sachs-marea-fabrica-de-crize-economice-6/

Articol nesemnat. Treaba ta daca iti iei informatiile din asemenea surse.

iuliu marinescu a scris:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Coleman_%28news_weathercaster%29

Cine este John Coleman? Un ziarist. Atat.

iuliu marinescu a scris:http://www.urbaniulian.ro/2010/01/26/nobelul-pentru-incalzire-globala-bazat-pe-o-eroare-unde-sunt-meteorologii-care-ziceau-ca-in-romania-ianuarie-2010-va-fi-neobisnuit-de-cald-33-de-romani-morti-din-cauza-gerului/

Iulian Urban e avocat. Nu vad in articolul mentionat nici un argument stiintific. Doar vorbaraie referitor la o minima a acelui an si la un numar de boschetari decedati din cauza frigului. Asta imi indica faptul ca omul s-a trezit in dimineata respectiva cu fata la cearseaf si probabil n-a putut nici sa scoata masina din parcare ca trecuse plugul si ii pusese o brazda de zapada in drum. Astea sunt sursele din care te informezi tu?!? Este vorba de circulatia curentilor de aer doar atunci cand iti convine tie?


iuliu marinescu a scris:http://www.hindu.com/2008/07/10/stories/2008071055521000.htm

Rusia e una din tarile cu interese economice majore in zona arctica iar convingerea mea personala este ca savantii rusi i-ar vinde si pe mama, si pe tata daca ar fi platiti corespunzator. O declaratie "stiintifica" in plus e pentru ei floare la ureche. Si... "The Hindu"?!?

iuliu marinescu a scris:http://www.romanialibera.ro/tehnologie/stiinta/statiile-meteo-vechi-de-150-de-ani-de-vina-pentru-teoria-incalzirii-globale-177606.html

John Christy poate sa fie o sursa credibila, dar problema ta este ca initial se pronunta rezervat cum ca "Inregistrarile temperaturilor nu pot constitui un indicator credibil al schimbarilor la nivel global". Numai ca mai tarziu revine asupra opiniei: "Part of the cooling trend seen by the satellites can be attributed to several years of cooler than normal temperatures and cooling caused by the eruption of the Mount Pinatubo volcano. Part of the discrepancy between the surface and atmospheric trends was resolved over a period of several years as Christy, Spencer and others identified several factors, including orbital drift and decay, that caused a net cooling bias in the data collected by the satellite instruments.[4][5] Since the data correction of August 1998 (and the major La Niña Pacific Ocean warming event of the same year), data collected by satellite instruments has shown an average global warming trend in the atmosphere. From November 1978 through March 2011,
Earth's atmosphere has warmed at an average rate of about 0.14 C per decade, according to the UAHuntsville satellite record."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Christy
Ross McKitrick, al carui nume apare in articol, este economist. Comentariile in legatura cu competenta lui sunt inutile.

iuliu marinescu a scris:http://thehotjoints.com/2009/01/28/global-warming-alarmist-james-hansens-former-nasa-supervisor-calls-him-an-embarrassment/

Pacat ca articolul nu mai e la locul lui, m-as fi straduit sa vad ce supervizor si ce a avut de zis despre James Hansen. "Ala a zis ca alalalt e varza" suna insa a barfa de joasa speta. Parca vad ca era tot vreun politician sau economist pus vataf peste specialisti... despre James Hansen, aici: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen

iuliu marinescu a scris:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html

Nu pot sa iau in considerare tabloidul Daily Mail ca sursa serioasa de informatii. Sursa oficiala spune cu totul altceva, si anume ca ziaristul David Rose a interpretat rauvoitor datele puse la dispozitie: http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/

iuliu marinescu a scris:Draga MadWolf postul care il precede pe cel din 26 decembrie este din februarie a.c. Asta demonstreaza ca ma intereseaza foarte tare sa "am dreptate" cu orice pret in fata unor oameni ca tine?


Asta demonstreaza ca exista episoade in existenta ta cand simti nevoia sa te contrezi cu cineva. Preluand si trambitand barfe pe post de adevaruri stiintifice, dezinformand, insultand, insinuand. Cum adica "in fata unor oameni ca mine"? Ce vrei sa insinuezi?

iuliu marinescu a scris:Sau in "turnul vostru de fildes", voi "cei alesi" puteti trage concluzii care sa sfideze logica formala, fara a va teme ca veti cadea in ridicol?!?


Tare sunt curios sa vad unde-i logica ta, din moment ce sursele tale de informare sunt cel putin dubioase si nici macar nu sesizezi ridicolul... pana una-alta iti recomand doua link-uri din surse credibile, nu balarii de articole scrise de ziaristi, politicieni si economisti:

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/24jul_greenland/

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic-seaice-2012.html

iuliu marinescu a scris:Inainte de a judeca despre "ascutimea" tonului meu mai bine ti-ai masura cuvintele care "pleaca" cumva de pe o pozitie, nu stiu de ce, mai "inalta", si nu "sufera" deloc de vreun iz de "condescendenta sfatoasa" a connaisseurului fata de un "amarat de" neofit ci mai degraba de o superioritate gaunoasa afisata doar, insa nesustinuta cu argumente pertinente care sa alunge orice umbra de indoiala.


Ti-am spus unde sa cauti ca sa te documentezi - paleontologie, carbuni, izotopi. Cand ti-am zis m-ai luat in bascalie, ca ce-ti trebuie tie cursuri, izotopi si ghetarul de la Scarisoara. Atata stii. Nu am de gand sa mai fac inca o data facultatea impreuna cu tine, mai ales cand vad cata insolenta afisezi la fiecare postare. Pe un genetician nu-l inveti genetica daca n-ai o diploma echivalenta. Nici pe un inginer nu-l iei la misto daca iti explica ceva despre rezistenta materialelor, chiar daca nu intelegi o boaba din formulele lui. Dar asa-i romanul. Cica la fotbal, politica, si mai nou la incalzire globala ne pricepem cu totii.

In ceea ce ma priveste eu o sa merg la dentist daca am o problema cu dintii (si nu la vreun economist!), o sa apelez la un economist sa-mi dea sfaturi daca o sa vreau vreodata sa-mi deschid o afacere (si nu la vreun dentist!), si o sa ma duc la Bogdan daca masina mea are o problema care ma depaseste. Te-ai prins? Patratul intra in gaura patrata, triunghiul in gaura triunghiulara si discul in gaura circulara. Evident insa ca daca esti suficient de puternic nu o sa te impiedici de asemenea detalii minore.

iuliu marinescu a scris:Pacat si rusine!


Stai in banca ta ca nu te-a abilitat nimeni sa ma pui la colt. Iar cand mai ai episoade din astea cu limbaj nepotrivit, senzatia ca esti neinteles, ca ai facut vreo descoperire epocala si ca baietii rai te vaneaza din cauza asta, incearca sa ceri ajutor specializat. Exista oameni care ar putea sa te ajute sa intelegi nitel din lumea din jurul tau. Evident, nici ei nu sunt experti in incalzire/racire globala, asa ca poti sa incerci sa-i aburesti.

P.S. Imi cer scuze colegilor de forum care asista la toata balacareala asta. Dar uite, s-a urcat dihania-n copac si nu vrea sa se dea jos nicicum... iar daca vreun moderator sau administratorul considera de cuviinta sa ma sanctioneze nu o sa ma supar. Chiar mi s-a luat de semidocti. Mda, s-a demonstrat ca pe decada s-a incalzit global Pamantul cu 0,14 grade Celsius din cauza concentratiei marite de CO2. Ceea ce ne arata si ghetarul de la Scarisoara. Asta nu s-ar fi intamplat daca omul nu ar fi existat deloc, prin absurd, pe Terra, spre exemplu.
Interesant, cum din orice alaturare haotica de observatii se poate alcatui o teorie. normal, fiindca spre deosebire de mecanica, fie ea si auto, constructii, siderurgie ori chirurgie, de pilda, aici nu te confrunti cu probleme care sa "iti explodeze in fata" daca faci ce nu trebuie iar speculatia teoretizanta nu face sa "crape" nimic fizic.
Cat despre banditul international si escroc cu vechi state de serviciu Rajendra Pachauri, "daca taceai, filozof ramaneai", vorba unui clasic in viata...Voi reveni cu amanunte despre acest ticalos.
La multi ani! CCNet 07/01/13
Met Office Forecasts No Global Temperature Rise
http://www.notoecotown.com/2013/01/original-message-from-benny-peiser-date.html
Global Warming Standstill May Last For 20 Years
The UK Met Office has revised its global temperature predictions as a result of a new version
of its climate model and climate simulations using it. It now believes that global temperatures
up to 2017 will most likely be 0.43 deg C above the 1971 -2000 average, with an error of +/-
0.15 deg C. In reality this is a forecast of no increase in global temperatures above current
levels. If the latest Met Office prediction is correct, and it accords far more closely with the
observed data than previous predictions, then it will prove to be a lesson in humility. It will
show that the previous predictions that were given so confidently as advice to the UK
government and so unquestioningly accepted by the media, were wrong, and that the socalled
sceptics who were derided for questioning them were actually on the right track. --
David Whitehouse, The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 7 January 2013
I argue that the greenhouse effect does not seem to be as significant as suggested. I personally
feel that the likelihood over the next century of greenhouse warming reaching magnitudes
comparable to natural variability seems small. And I certainly feel that there is time and need
for research before making major policy decisions. It seems to me that if science doesn’t have
integrity, it isn’t of much use to people. --Richard Lindzen, MIT Talk, 27 September 1989
The stupidest international agreement since the Treaty of Versailles expired at midnight on
New Year’s Eve. Fifteen years after its launch, the Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change died a miserable failure. Few are likely to mourn. In Britain,
however, the Government remains wedded to a post-Kyoto strategy, and along with the rest of
the EU has agreed to ‘extend’ the treaty’s provisions. British policy, enshrined in the current
Energy Bill, is being driven not by evidence but by irrational dogma, and to question it is to
be accused of endangering the planet. In reality, a disaster of a different kind looms: years of
chronic impoverishment while competitors roar ahead and world CO2 emissions rise
unchecked. Welcome to the British industrial counter-revolution. --David Rose, Mail on
Sunday, 6 January 2013
Not that anyone has noticed, but the Kyoto Protocol expired on 31 December, with carbon
emissions up by 58% over 1990 levels – instead the 5% cut the signatories envisaged. All that
fuss for worse-than-nothing. Kyoto has not been replaced, because a new era of climate
change rationalism is slowly taking root. As Nigel Lawson predicted, the hysteria of the last
few years is cooling. There’s no point legislating for change that’s not going to happen. --
Fraser Nelson, The Spectator, 6 January 2013
Did you know that the Earth is getting greener, quite literally? Satellites are now confirming
that the amount of green vegetation on the planet has been increasing for three decades. This
will be news to those accustomed to alarming tales about deforestation, overdevelopment and
ecosystem destruction. --Matt Ridley, The Wall Street Journal, 5 January 2013
Global warming, the tool of the West
By Stanislav Mishin
Quelle: PRAVDA / 04.01.2013
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/04-01-2013/123380-global_warming-0/
For years, the Elites of the West have cranked up the myth of Man Made Global Warming as
a means first and foremost to control the lives and behaviors of their populations. Knowing
full well that their produce in China and sell in the West model and its consiquent spiral
downward in wages and thus standards of living, was unsustainable, the elites moved to use
this new "science" to guilt trip and scare monger their populations into smaller and more
conservatives forms of living. In other words, they coasted them into the poverty that the
greed and treason of those said same elites was already creating in their native lands.
What better way to staunch protests at worsening economic and life conditions than to make
it feel like an honourable job/duty of the people to save "Gia". At the same time, they used this
"science" as a new pagan religion to further push out the Christianity they hate and despise
and most of all, fear? Gia worship, the earth "mother", has been pushed in popular culture
oozing out of the West for a better part of the past 1.5 decades. This is a religion replete with
an army of priests, called Government Grant Scientists.
Various groups have fought back. This is including Russian hackers, who published a huge
database of UK government, scientific and university emails depicting the fixing of data to
sell Global Warming, er Climate Change (as if it never changed on its own). And while taking
hit after hit, the beast, like Al Quida, will not die. As a matter of fact, the beast is on a steady
come back, as it is quite useful during the down times recession. The US alone spends $7
billion each year on warming "studies", which is, in truth, nothing but a huge money
laundering operation, as no real science is conducted and vapid alarmist reports the only
product generated.
Amongst the newest claims of pending disasters, is a cry that icepacks are now melting at
three times the rate of the 1990s, even though there has not been any significant warming in
the past 20 years. Greenland's icepack melt off, has been linked to volcanic activity under the
ice, heating it. Must be the magmamen and their SUVs. These facts, however, do not faze the
Gia crowd and their Elite/Governmental backers. The fact that a super storm hit the NE US is
also being played as evidence of GW. Thank God that before GW no such things ever
happened. How are they to explain that Russia and Eastern Europe are projected to have the
coldest winter in 20 years? Oh, but I doubt my Western readers are even aware of that.
Now, with their economies in a spiral of debt laden, non-manufacturing recession (if not out
and out depression), the Elites, who sense they are loosing their grip or toe hold on key
economic regions outside their home regions, are once again calling out their inquisitors of
Global Warming and sending them towards the developing world.
The first salvo has been fired by a British Warming dandy named Lord Nicholas Stern of
Brentford, who as an academic at Whitehall, has made a career and quite a bit of money off
of this scam. Lord Stern, a former World Bank chief economist and author of the landmark
Stern review of the economics of climate change, was a close associate of Gordon Brown and
the Leftists, who with the Tory counterparts and in parallel to the American
Democrats/Republicans set up the grand and self destructive economic schemes that have
plunged their own nations and many many others into the abyss of poverty.
The good Lord Stern, in commentary on why countries such as Russia, China, India and
Brazil, in other words, the BRICs, have to pony up cash and depress their own growth, made
this statement for the Guardian paper: "It's a brutal arithmetic - the changing structure of the
world's economy has been dramatic. That is something developing countries will have to face
up to,"
His premiss is that even if you take out the deindustrialized West, run away Global Warming
will not stop due to the industrialized world. Its now all the fault of those raising themselves
up for the destruction of the world, from the phantom joke of GW. Lord Stern tried to assure
that the opening salvo was not a salvo, by stating: "I am not pointing the finger at the
developing world, just looking at what is necessary. I am not accusing or proposing, just
calculating what is needed [to meet scientific estimates of the emissions cuts needed to avoid
dangerous levels of climate change]". More like a calculated accusation. After all, this is not
some light weight of the GIA cult, but the movement's chief economist who enjoyed the ear of
the UK government: a perfect tool of the Western Elites.
Expect the cries to get louder and more shrill in the months to follow.
Stanislav Mishin
14.000 Abandoned Wind Turbines In The USA
Posted by Tory Aardvark, Nov 17 2012
Abandoned wind farm at South Point Hawaii
There are many hidden truths about the world of wind turbines from the pollution and environmental
damage caused in China by manufacturing bird choppers, the blight on people’s lives of noise and the
flicker factor and the countless numbers of birds that are killed each year by these blots on the
landscape.
The symbol of Green renewable energy, our saviour from the non existent problem of Global
Warming, abandoned wind farms are starting to litter the planet as globally governments cut the
subsidies taxes that consumers pay for the privilege of having a very expensive power source that does
not work every day for various reasons like it’s too cold or the wind speed is too high.
The US experience with wind farms has left over 14,000 wind turbines abandoned and slowly
decaying, in most instances the turbines are just left as symbols of a dying Climate Religion, nowhere
have the Green Environmentalists appeared to clear up their mess or even complain about the
abandoned wind farms.
The US has had wind farms since 1981:
“Some say that Ka Le is haunted—and it is. But it’s haunted not by Hawaii’s legendary night
marchers. The mysterious sounds are “Na leo o Kamaoa”– the disembodied voices of 37 skeletal wind
turbines abandoned to rust on the hundred-acre site of the former Kamaoa Wind Farm…
The ghosts of Kamaoa are not alone in warning us. Five other abandoned wind sites dot the Hawaiian
Isles—but it is in California where the impact of past mandates and subsidies is felt most strongly.
Thousands of abandoned wind turbines littered the landscape of wind energy’s California “big three”
locations—Altamont Pass, Tehachapin (above), and San Gorgonio—considered among the world’s
best wind sites…
California’s wind farms— comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity—ceased to
generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000 turbines were
simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills…”
The problem with wind farms when they are abandoned is getting the turbines removed, as usual there
are non Green environmentalists to be seen:
The City of Palm Springs was forced to enact an ordinance requiring their removal from San
Gorgonio. But California’s Kern County, encompassing the Tehachapi area, has no such law
Imagine the outraged Green chorus if those turbines were abandoned oil drilling rigs.
It took nearly a decade from the time the first flimsy wind turbines were installed before the
performance of California wind projects could dispel the widespread belief among the public and
investors that wind energy was just a tax scam.
Ben Lieberman, a senior policy analyst focusing on energy and environmental issues for the Heritage
Foundation, is not surprised. He asks:
“If wind power made sense, why would it need a government subsidy in the first place? It’s a bubble
which bursts as soon as the government subsidies end.”
“It’s a bubble which bursts as soon as the government subsidies end” therein lies a lesson that is
going be learnt by those that sought to make fortunes out of tax payer subsidies, the whole renewables
industry of solar, wind and biomass is just an artificial bubble incapable of surviving without subsides
from governments and tax payers which many businesses and NGO’s like WWF, FoE and Greenpeace
now think is their god given right, as the money is going on Green Climate Religion approved clean
energy.
The Green evangelists who push so hard for these wind farms, as usual have not thought the whole
idea through, no surprises for a left agenda like Climate Change, which like all things Green and
socialist is just a knee jerk reaction:
Altamont’s turbines have since 2008 been tethered four months of every year in an effort to protect
migrating birds after environmentalists filed suit. According to the Golden Gate Audubon Society, 75
to 110 Golden Eagles, 380 Burrowing Owls, 300 Red-tailed Hawks, and 333 American Kestrels
(falcons) are killed by Altamont turbines annually. A July, 2008 study by the Alameda County
Community Development Agency points to 10,000 annual bird deaths from Altamont Pass wind
turbines. Audubon calls Altamont, “probably the worst site ever chosen for a wind energy project.”
The same areas that are good for siting wind farms are also good for birds of prey and migrating
birds to pass through, shame for the birds that none of the Green mental midgets who care so much
about everything in nature, thought that one through when pushing their anti fossil fuel agenda.
After the debacle of the First California Wind Rush, the European Union had moved ahead of the US
on efforts to subsidize “renewable” energy–including a “Feed in Tariff” even more lucrative than the
ISO4 contracts.
The tax payers who paid for the subsidies to build the wind farms, then paid over the odds for an
unreliable source of power generation will, ultimately be left to pick up the bill for clearing up the
Green eco mess in the post man made Global Warming world.
Updated November 24th
In answer to several allegations that the number of abandoned wind turbines was made up, the
following quote from the article and link will confirm this figure to be true:
California’s wind farms — then comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity —
ceased to generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000
turbines were simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills.
[b]Mar 29, 2013
Global warming: if only we’d listened to the experts, eh?
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate%20vom%2029.3.2013

Note: I sat on a panel with James and Dr Singer a few years back at one of
the ICCC conferences. James did not nor would not claim to be a weather or
climate expert but a pundit and one of the very few who ‘get it’ and are
willing to buck the mainstream currents and tell the truth.

By James Delingpole

Sir John Beddington, the government’s retiring Chief Scientist has been
doing the media rounds today, telling anyone who’ll listen how “Climate
Change” is still a serious problem about which we should all worry
greatly.


Has he looked out of the window recently?

Looking out of my window just now, I noticed that the Northamptonshire
landscape was completely blanketed in Dr David Viner (who predicted snow
was a thing of the past in 2000). Just like it was yesterday. And the day
before that, when we rescued two orphaned lambs from the frozen fields.
Which isn’t something you normally expect in March, is it? (See more)



I’m sure I know what Beddington would say in reply to this. “Weather is
not climate.” No, indeed. But it’s an argument which would surely carry a
lot more weight if Beddington and his alarmist brethren hadn’t spent most
of the Nineties and Noughties citing the hot summers and mild winters as
evidence of man-made global warming. Later, as we know, they amended their
scare-phrase to the more inclusive “climate change”. Then, growing more
desperate as global mean temperatures stubbornly refused to rise with the
alacrity their dodgy computer models predicted they would, they even had a
stab at popularising “global climate disruption” and “global weirding”.
Had these caught on (which they didn’t, really) it would have been a
brilliant coup because what it would have meant is that whenever the
weather did anything weird anywhere in the world (which weather does, by
the way, all the time) the alarmist movement would have scored another
propaganda victory.

Actually, though, if you’ll look at the facts - something that the
Warmists appear increasingly loath to do - what you’ll realise is that our
winters ARE getting colder. That there has been no statistically
significant warming since January 1997. That the CAGW hypothesis is
looking increasingly threadbare. And that, therefore, the billions if not
trillions that Britain and the other Western industrialised economies have
spent “combatting climate change” have very likely been utterly wasted.

This is what I find so puzzling about Beddington’s media circus antics
today. If I were in his shoes, if I’d been involved in promulgating a
disgraceful scam whereby the global depression was prolonged and deepened,
where thousands of people died in artificially induced fuel poverty, where
some of the world’s most beautiful scenery had been ravaged with wind
turbines and solar panels and I had then been found out by events, the
very last thing I’d be doing was traipsing round the BBC studios crowing
about my achievements. What I’d actually be doing is retiring to my study
with a bottle of whisky and my trusty service pistol, there to do the only
proper and decent thing a chap should do when he has brought shame on
himself and caused untold suffering to millions.[/b] Up!!! Un nou record al incalzirii globale... yeap
se vand costumele de baie pe vremea asta in rimt alert
daca o tine asa facem 1 decembrie la mare incalzirea globala e un mit....desigur ca sunteti destul de mari sa stiti asta. Sopteste-i si lui MadWolf. Dar la ureche sa nu v-auda cineva
Format forum: Optimizat | LentAfișează mesajele:   
Crează un topic nou, separat de acest topic   Răspunde la mesajele din acest topic    Pagina de start -> Cafenea Ora este GMT + 2 ore
Pagina Anterioară  1, 2
Pagina 2 din 2
Nu poți crea un topic nou în acest forum
Nu poți răspunde în mesajele din acest forum
Nu poți modifica mesajele proprii din acest forum
Nu poți șterge mesajele proprii din acest forum
Nu poți vota în chestionarele din acest forum

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Varianta în limba română: Romanian phpBB online community