Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
cooler because year over year cooler means drier and drought.. warmer means rain.
I have presented multiple articles on that fact to you.
Why do you think we have been hopping for warming el nino rains out here. And we got them to some degree and at least one of our reservoirs has had to release water because it was refilling very quickly. I presented and article about that too.
now I am not sure what happens in colorado. perahaps when storms miss California the the more northerly jet stream pounds colorado.
but... in general cooler means drier.
I have presented multiple articles on that fact to you.
Why do you think we have been hopping for warming el nino rains out here. And we got them to some degree and at least one of our reservoirs has had to release water because it was refilling very quickly. I presented and article about that too.
now I am not sure what happens in colorado. perahaps when storms miss California the the more northerly jet stream pounds colorado.
but... in general cooler means drier.
Last edited:
Computers only add to the pre-existing bias where the conclusion is determined before the science. Now with computers scientists funded with government grants can create models to support conclusions and then declare their predisposed results is "settled science".
In other news, a large tract builder (Pulte) recently cleared 3000 acres around the corner bulldozing every tree. They are hosting an "Earth Day" celebration tomorrow... so come down for their marketing event and buy a new home.
Billionaire John Paul DeJoria: This type of success is really just failure
"Paul Mitchell and Patron Tequila have two things in common: John Paul DeJoria and his commitment to sustainability.
"We feel that success unshared is failure and giving back is part of business," DeJoria told CNBC.
His goal is to make sure his businesses are "extremely environmental, animal and human friendly." As part of his endeavors, the Paul Mitchell Tea Tree Drive has planted more than 340,000 trees in order to offset the company's carbon footprint.
Patron Tequila is bottled in recycled glass. The spirits maker also filters the distillage created in the tequila making process so that it can be used as fertilizer..."
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/22/bill...s-type-of-success-is-really-just-failure.html
"Paul Mitchell and Patron Tequila have two things in common: John Paul DeJoria and his commitment to sustainability.
"We feel that success unshared is failure and giving back is part of business," DeJoria told CNBC.
His goal is to make sure his businesses are "extremely environmental, animal and human friendly." As part of his endeavors, the Paul Mitchell Tea Tree Drive has planted more than 340,000 trees in order to offset the company's carbon footprint.
Patron Tequila is bottled in recycled glass. The spirits maker also filters the distillage created in the tequila making process so that it can be used as fertilizer..."
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/22/bill...s-type-of-success-is-really-just-failure.html
FLASHBACK 1977: Earth Day Co-Founder Kills, Composts Girlfriend
Read more: http://dailycaller.com#ixzz46aDZ2eZr
Read more: http://dailycaller.com#ixzz46aDZ2eZr
nope... I presented you with articles showing you drought in California historically showed up during cooler dryer times.
by the way I did not find any graphs outside of San Diego with California temps. But those San Diego graphs showing showed cooling for about the last 20 years or perhaps back the 1988 el nino. (when looking at the "unadjusted" data. The recently adjusted data shows no trends. )
Oddly... I can tell you for damn sure it was quite hot in 1988. I moved here in 1988 and it was pretty damn hot that year. It was over 100 degrees for the first 4 or 5 days I lived here .. it was hot all fall with some rain. It does not surprise me that we have been cooling a bit since.
by the way I did not find any graphs outside of San Diego with California temps. But those San Diego graphs showing showed cooling for about the last 20 years or perhaps back the 1988 el nino. (when looking at the "unadjusted" data. The recently adjusted data shows no trends. )
Oddly... I can tell you for damn sure it was quite hot in 1988. I moved here in 1988 and it was pretty damn hot that year. It was over 100 degrees for the first 4 or 5 days I lived here .. it was hot all fall with some rain. It does not surprise me that we have been cooling a bit since.
thanks for that post... that is the correct way to be a conservative in my opinion. in the conservation sense of the word. and old school conservative philosophy... not this neo con / leftist perversion.
letting private industry capitalize on conservation.
letting private industry capitalize on conservation.
Why Even President Trump Won’t Kill The Climate Deal
It would just be too embarrassing.
04/23/2016 08:03 am E
"When the leading Republican presidential candidate calls climate change a hoax dreamed up by the Chinese government, environmentalists have a reason to be concerned.
"But even if the American people put a climate change denier like Donald Trump in the White House, the U.S. remains unlikely to renege on its carbon cutting commitments under the Paris climate agreement, experts say.
"Pulling out of the 196-nation agreement would risk ruining America’s credibility within the international community, according to Elliot Diringer, executive vice president of the nonprofit and nonpartisan Center for Climate and Energy Solutions.
"Ditching the Paris accord “would almost certainly trigger a major diplomatic backlash,” Diringer told reporters in a conference call on Thursday. “To renounce it would undermine U.S. credibility and influence abroad.”
"Globally, Obama’s commitment to the Paris agreement is seen as a sign of U.S. leadership on climate change, and balking on that commitment would “turn the U.S. from a leader into a defector,” Diringer added.
"There’s no sign at all of a concerted effort on the Hill to challenge the agreement. Elliot Diringer, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions
The U.S. and nearly 170 other countries signed the Paris climate agreement, which aims to limit global warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius, in a ceremony at the United Nations headquarters in New York on Friday.
"Although the U.S. has officially signed on to the accord, the next president could still in theory refuse to uphold America’s commitment to cutting carbon emissions. Under the Paris accord, carbon reductions are voluntary and established by each country. In addition, the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change lacks a way to enforce each country’s pledge.
“In the end, presidents, especially if they have a Congress that’s willing to go along, can totally shape U.S. climate policy and can reshape it,” David Goldston, director of government affairs at the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, told Public Radio International in March.
"There’s a history of newly elected presidents abandoning international treaties their predecessors endorsed. In 2001, former President George Bush famously rejected the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, which the U.S. had signed on to in 1998.
"The major difference between the Kyoto protocol and the Paris agreement? Kyoto required only developed nations to slash greenhouse gas emissions, exempting 100 countries, including China and India, from mandatory reductions. In the Paris agreement, all countries are on the hook to cut emissions.
"Diringer thinks it’s unlikely that the next president would totally abandon the Paris agreement. And he isn’t alone in this view. Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and a senior adviser to the U.N., made much the same argument this week.
"To back out of the agreement, “you [would] have to blow off the whole rest of the world,” Sachs told CNN on Friday. “And I don’t think [the U.S. would] find another partner to do that. You’d have to just be the renegade state.”
"Moreover, Americans want the government to get serious about climate change. Over 90 percent of Americans believe in global warming and two-thirds support the Paris deal, whereas as late as 2005, fewer than half of Americans said they supported the Kyoto protocol. Public support for the agreement might already be pushing the Republican-controlled Congress to accept the climate deal, or at least not publicly oppose it.
“We’re seeing a tacit acceptance [of the Paris agreement] in Congress,” Diringer said. “There’s no sign at all of a concerted effort on the Hill to challenge the agreement.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republican-president-climate-deal_us_571a7fc4e4b0d912d5fe9f60
It would just be too embarrassing.
04/23/2016 08:03 am E
"When the leading Republican presidential candidate calls climate change a hoax dreamed up by the Chinese government, environmentalists have a reason to be concerned.
"But even if the American people put a climate change denier like Donald Trump in the White House, the U.S. remains unlikely to renege on its carbon cutting commitments under the Paris climate agreement, experts say.
"Pulling out of the 196-nation agreement would risk ruining America’s credibility within the international community, according to Elliot Diringer, executive vice president of the nonprofit and nonpartisan Center for Climate and Energy Solutions.
"Ditching the Paris accord “would almost certainly trigger a major diplomatic backlash,” Diringer told reporters in a conference call on Thursday. “To renounce it would undermine U.S. credibility and influence abroad.”
"Globally, Obama’s commitment to the Paris agreement is seen as a sign of U.S. leadership on climate change, and balking on that commitment would “turn the U.S. from a leader into a defector,” Diringer added.
"There’s no sign at all of a concerted effort on the Hill to challenge the agreement. Elliot Diringer, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions
The U.S. and nearly 170 other countries signed the Paris climate agreement, which aims to limit global warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius, in a ceremony at the United Nations headquarters in New York on Friday.
"Although the U.S. has officially signed on to the accord, the next president could still in theory refuse to uphold America’s commitment to cutting carbon emissions. Under the Paris accord, carbon reductions are voluntary and established by each country. In addition, the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change lacks a way to enforce each country’s pledge.
“In the end, presidents, especially if they have a Congress that’s willing to go along, can totally shape U.S. climate policy and can reshape it,” David Goldston, director of government affairs at the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, told Public Radio International in March.
"There’s a history of newly elected presidents abandoning international treaties their predecessors endorsed. In 2001, former President George Bush famously rejected the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, which the U.S. had signed on to in 1998.
"The major difference between the Kyoto protocol and the Paris agreement? Kyoto required only developed nations to slash greenhouse gas emissions, exempting 100 countries, including China and India, from mandatory reductions. In the Paris agreement, all countries are on the hook to cut emissions.
"Diringer thinks it’s unlikely that the next president would totally abandon the Paris agreement. And he isn’t alone in this view. Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and a senior adviser to the U.N., made much the same argument this week.
"To back out of the agreement, “you [would] have to blow off the whole rest of the world,” Sachs told CNN on Friday. “And I don’t think [the U.S. would] find another partner to do that. You’d have to just be the renegade state.”
"Moreover, Americans want the government to get serious about climate change. Over 90 percent of Americans believe in global warming and two-thirds support the Paris deal, whereas as late as 2005, fewer than half of Americans said they supported the Kyoto protocol. Public support for the agreement might already be pushing the Republican-controlled Congress to accept the climate deal, or at least not publicly oppose it.
“We’re seeing a tacit acceptance [of the Paris agreement] in Congress,” Diringer said. “There’s no sign at all of a concerted effort on the Hill to challenge the agreement.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republican-president-climate-deal_us_571a7fc4e4b0d912d5fe9f60