All Solar, Et Al, In 12 Years?

[Cigar]

Since "scientists" say we are going into a mini-iceage in 15 years what's the big deal? why keep pumping money into universities and government if we don't need to? Find another way to pay the public employee pensions.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

But the glaciers are still melting, there is no denying that.

The problem one has is projecting local climate/temperatures onto a global scale and visa versa. Just like California is having an extreme drought with a forecast of a big El Nino coming. Needless to say, when that happens and subsequent storms, all of which are cyclical and not predictable, so too are the events occurring all over the world.

The glaciers are not all equal, nor are they uniformly distributed over the globe.

There are 198,000 glaciers in the World. There are difficulties in distinguishing between glaciers and snowpacks. If these small glacierets are including, the number of glaciers in the World could be up to 400,000, but they would still only account for 1.4% of the World’s glacierised area.

Together, these glaciers cover 726,000 km2. The region with the most ice is the Antarctic and Subantarctic, with 132,900 km2, closely followed by Arctic Canada North (104,900 km2). At the other end of the scale, New Zealand has only 1160 km2of ice. In total, 44% of the World’s glacierised area is in the Arctic regions, and 18% is in the Antarctic and Subantarctic. Glaciers cover 0.5% of the Earth’s land surface.

Most of the World’s glaciers lie below 2000 m above sea level, and in most regions, most of the glacierised area is in the mid-elevation ranges. The distribution of area with elevation is skewed in the Antarctic; the low-lying tidewater glaciers mean that the Antarctic has a large amount of low-lying ice. In contrast, Arctic Canada North is skewed towards higher elevations, due to the preponderance of ice caps on high-elevation plateaus. The distribution of glacier area with altitude is important, as it means that different areas will respond to climate change in different ways.

Estimates of global glacier volume use various methods of volume-area scaling. Radić et al., 2014, use the RGI to estimate global glacier volume at 405 mm sea-level equivalent (SLE) (146,949 Gt or 163,276 km3 ice)14. Grinstead, 2013, used a different approach to reach a lower estimate of 350 ±70 mm SLE15. The estimate of glacier volume depends strongly on the method used, and more data are urgently required to improve the uncertainties on this estimate.

http://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/mapping-worlds-glaciers/

As you know history, there is the "Little Ice Age." Look it up. Climate changes because the earth is cyclical as is the sun.

Melting glaciers are not causing the sea level to rise as catastrophically as reported.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

The earth has been warming for 15,000 years since the last Ice Age. The glaciers have melted before. As they melt and as the oceans warm, then more CO2 is released. So the argument becomes which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did CO2 cause global warming? Or is global warming increasing CO2. If both are correct then we have a feedback loop that has to run its course and the logical course is another Ice Age eventually.

The last one lasted about 100,000 years and we've had 4 in 400,000 years. Ice Ages appear to be much longer than the intervening warm periods

 

[Cigar]

A few years ago I took the family over to the California Academy of Sciences to an exhibit the wife wanted to see. As we entered on the first floor their was a global warming exhibit in one corner, outside there were dozens of yellow school buses lined up and lines of kids were being brought in to "play" in the exhibit, there was a huge metal teeter-totter that kids could get on and load the other end to show balance in their carbon output, the whole display was dominated by a huge Michael Mann Hockey stick, it had to soar 15' high, down on the lower level portion there was no indication of either the medieval warming period or the mini-ice age.

I was fascinated to see this blatant indoctrination going on at public expense, the wife wanted to move on to her exhibit above, the 55 year-old kid said: "Dad, let's get out of here, I don't care where we go next but I want out of this corner", what I saw was he was watching indoctrination and without realizing it he was very uncomfortable. Socrates was sentenced to death for corrupting the youth, the ancient Greeks had something there. Some green groups say that the earth has a carrying capacity of 700 million to 1.2 billion humans, we are pushing 8 billion now with the population of Africa exploding, looks like the eugenicists were right, what I don't understand is Obama's Science Adviser, John Holdren's life work has been depopulating the earth, one of the Rockefeller foundation's main interests has been depopulating the earth, at a Senate Committee hearing a few years ago Senator Jay Rockefeller called John Holdren a "saint" for his work.

 

[Meandering]

Over population IS the problem in my mind.

Our population is no longer controlled by disease,
war, or
old age.

I'm well aware of the mini ice age, and while it was a great event to freeze trees that made wood for the world's best violins, it was also the reason the Civil War was fought in the South in the summer wearing wool coats. Don't try that today, And that was only 150 years ago.

Warming and cooling is part of the world's natural cycle. But it makes great sales pitches to sell stuff we really don't need in order to put on a front of "caring"

Socially Responsible Global Citizen
Play the Market Volatility
Make Money, Eat Steak
Save the World form
Cow Gas

.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Over population IS the problem in my mind.

Are you, your children, extended family, volunteering to step inside the elimination chamber for the greater good theory, Marion?

Actions are right to the degree that they tend to promote the greatest good for the greatest number.

Of course, we are still unclear about what constitutes "the greatest good." But if population numbers are creating harm for the total, that intuitively leads to the measure of who has the life that contributes to the well being of the greater number. Shall we measure consumption as in who consumes the least? Or shall we measure production as in who produces the most?

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I was fascinated to see this blatant indoctrination going on at public expense

Science Historian, Thomas Kuhn wrote a book called, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions". In it he explains that there are two kinds of science paradigms.
The first is normal science. Normal science as he describes it, is a consensus of belief within a community of scientists. Global Warming scientists are "normal" in that they have a herd mentality that GW is real. Therefore, all their research is geared to prove that they are right. It affects the very way they test to see since the experiments (or in their case the models) are perfectly designed to prove GW, not disprove it. None of it is actually testing it to see if it can be wrong. The paradigm is right because everyone says it is right.

In 1912, a meteorologist claimed that the continents are drifting and see how that the west coast of Africa is the inverse of the east coast of S. America? The normal geologists of the day scoffed. Continents? Floating around like jetsam? How silly...and by the way that is the realm of the geologist not some silly meteorologist that cannot tell the weather next week. What do you know?

By the middle of the 1960s, it was clear that Alfred Wegener was exactly right and "Continental Drift" became a reality. Wegener was a revolutionary. And Kuhn calls this revolutionary science - the scientific paradigm that questions what is considered to be "normal" and therefore, makes the real discoveries that are ultimately confirmed. Science advances by revolution not by consensus.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

A theory in science is one that can not only explain the facts, but can be tested with experimentation and predictions. Theories are concise, coherent, systematic, and predictive.

Global warming falls into the category of hypotheses - a proposed explanation of the facts whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation. So far, the predictions made have not come to past.

 

[Cigar]

Eisenhower warned us in his 1960 Farewell Address, much has been made about his military Industrial complex warning, but few go far enough to quote his scientific-technological elite warning.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.¹

Our universities are exploding in money as long as they give the government what they want, here in the Bay Area Stanford and UCSF hospitals are expanding all over the place, they are fighting to buy control of all local hospitals, my local hospital just spent a billion dollars on an expansion and UCSF has taken over most of it, Stanford has taken over one wing so the two had to have made a deal.

I built a home for an attorney in 1978, I met with him Saturday on a window issue, the home sold immediately to two CAL doctors, they are paying cash and their financial statement shows millions of dollars a year in income as well as millions in multiple bank accounts, all of my regular doctors are retiring because they aren't getting paid enough to stay in business.

BTW, the attorney has retired and moving to Nevada because of California's taxes, he wants to sell one shopping center and his California capital gains tax would be over a million dollars on that one transaction.

¹ http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ike.htm

 

[Randolph Kinney]

BTW, the attorney has retired and moving to Nevada because of California's taxes, he wants to sell one shopping center and his California capital gains tax would be over a million dollars on that one transaction.

You know about California tracking and monitoring wealthy people who move out of state, right?