bombadil wrote:
Yeh, here in PA we had 14 inches from Friday through Saturday, then an additional 8 inches Tuesday night.

I had a Maine Coon when I lived in Minneapolis.  Quite a nice cat, very calm and laid back and, of course, one huge son of a bitch.

We had 22 inches here Friday-Saturday and then another 8 or so yesterday.  Too much.

jasonw1239 wrote:The record in my area of Atlantic Canada was set in February of 1992 with a two day storm that dropped 65 inches. That shut us down for a few days.  

Our typical storms drop 8 to 12 inches which is mainly an inconvenience.

We had a storm back in Spring of 1993 that was the largest on record in which we had 33 or so.  It was brutal.  This storm is 4th for the area all time.

Badmike wrote:
Yes I notice has "Global Warming" has become "Climate Change" recently with the cold winters we are experiencing.    Hard for the Global Warming experts to keep a straight face when the snow is falling at record rates....I actually saw a special on PBS awhile back about "Climate Change" and a researcher tried to keep a straight face explaining about how the warmer weather is leading to more....colder weather.  Sheesh!  

Mike B.

Global Warming has obviously not been "proven" one way or another as the scientific community is still very much split on the phenomena.  There are certainly heavy partisans on both sides  of the issue(who are likely very well compensated for their "professional point of view"), but sooner or later if evidence was anywhere near concrete one side or the other would eventually start to evaporate away in lieu of overwhelming evidence.

With that said, Global warming in theory will lead to more and more extreme weather conditions, i.e Hurricanes, Tornadoes & Nor'easters, El Ninos, Blizzards, etc., etc. over the course of time.  It's not just something that the average global temperature keeps raising until one day everyone is dead, living in caves or living at the poles. For example I can remember a couple years ago that in the middle of January it was 84 degrees F at 10pm one night(and quite warm day/night 70+ over a period of a few days thereafter)

With that in mind, such a small sampling of events as what has occurred over the last few days across the US isn't anywhere near enough evidence to prove things one or the other, although regardless of that, it will not prevent either side of the debate at this point from trying to claim it as such.

jasonw1239 wrote:Climate change my friend! Dallas is merely one data point in a large world. You have to look at the big worldwide picture.

True.  It'd be interesting to have a poll on how many people are experiencing unusual weather, as that would be more indicative of climate change.  Here in Toronto we are on track to have the least amount of winter snow ever recorded.

RaisedFromTheDead wrote:The huge mistake that was made was labeling it "global warming", the layman thinks in terms of higher temps, and while that is inevitable, it manifests in extreme weather in many cases.

Actually, the huge mistake was presenting fraudulent data.

On the pollution front, the U.S. has actually lowered its pollution footprint since the 70s. That is fact.

Climate change or global warming is a money grab and power grab. Always has been. These are the same people who were screaming that we were on the verge of a new ice age back in the 70s.

Funny how all the solutions presented by our green friends involve taxing the living crap out of american business and by association the general public. Green economy my ass. There is no such thing. Government-funded solutions are never the answer in cases such as this. Government money is not government money - it is money that the government has taken, via taxation, from the public sector. There is nothing self-sustaining about any government program - and this entire green jobs bullshit is no different.

And just to be clear: I do think we can continue to reduce pollution, we should recycle as much as possible, we should pursue energy independence (we could be like the french [who are loved by the american left] and build some nuke plants), we should invest in alternative fuel technologies as it relates to transportation. But, let the public sector be the driving force, not the government (or specifically a political party).

But lying to americans by saying NY will be under water in 40 years and other bullshit is not going to inspire anyone. That type of talk reaks of fraud. Americans are inspired by reaching for a dream and success. They will innovate and lead through natural events, not fiction. Americans will eventually do the right thing, sometimes after much delay or severe error. But that is how it works.

bbarsh wrote:Climate change or global warming is a money grab and power grab. Always has been. These are the same people who were screaming that we were on the verge of a new ice age back in the 70s.

Perhaps that's true, perhaps not.  I don't think it is, but it really doesn't matter either way.  (If it is indeed happening, someone could just as easily lie to you and say it isn't, and find ways to profit.)  What matters is whether it's actually happening, not who is profiting from and/or lying about it.

Funny how all the solutions presented by our green friends involve taxing the living crap out of american business and by association the general public.

Government solutions are less efficient, of that there is little doubt.  Personally I'd love it if corporate America were to take the lead on this stuff, but thus far they haven't really stepped up.  At least some businesses (and individuals) are starting to realize being "green" can be profitable, too.

I do think we can continue to reduce pollution, we should recycle as much as possible, we should pursue energy independence (we could be like the french [who are loved by the american left] and build some nuke plants), we should invest in alternative fuel technologies as it relates to transportation.

Reducing the use of oil would seem somewhat more important than fussing over where you're getting it from, as would reducing transportation over developing alternative fuels...but yes, that's a start.  

Unfortunately people haven't got their heads on straight about this stuff, and think that little things like switching a two-hour commute by car to a two-hour commute by bus is sufficient.  That's one only small step for man -- where's the giant leap for mankind?

But lying to americans by saying NY will be under water in 40 years and other bullshit is not going to inspire anyone.

The laws of physics would appear to apply to NYC.  My dubious internet info states the lowest point in NYC is a mere eight feet above sea level.  For the sake of argument, let's say that is correct.  I've never been there.

So if the sea levels rise by eight feet or more and people do nothing, parts of NYC will be underwater.  Of course, that won't ever happen, because as soon as it's obvious that the sea is rolling in, pepole will take action.  In the worst case, NYC will build a water barrier like Holland and say, "In your face, Nature!".

The problem with any sort of potential disaster, really, is that you can't wait until it happens -- that's too late.  You have to make contingency plans for the worst case as best you can.

For example, I don't think NYC gets a lot of serious earthquakes, but I'm sure data centers in the region have earthquake insurance, earthquake protection, and earthquake contingency planning.  Perhaps they need to sell climate change insurance.

bbarsh wrote:let the public sector be the driving force

I agree completely.

It may seem that the US is being singled out in the global climate change talks but you have to consider the amount of consumption in the US in comparison to other countries.

According to figures from the CIA World Factbook (2007):

Daily consumption of oil (barrels per day).

United States = 20,680,000
China = 7,578,000
Japan = 5,007, 000
Russia = 2,858,000
India = 2,722,000
Germany = 2,456,000

As you can see the US consumes roughly the same amount of oil daily as the next top five consuming countries combined.

RaisedFromTheDead wrote:Humans by nature are lazy and greedy. We shit in our own yard and leave it there until it is intolerable, THEN we clean it up.

Actually I think we move to another place rather than clean it up... the documentry "The Lost Gods of Easter Island" (2000) by David Attenborough springs to mind when I say that.. Looks at Easter Island and what happened there, its a good watch..  couldn't find a sutable summary but...


A jewel of an island floating in an endless sea. A seemingly never-ending supply of raw materials. Technological advances. Population growth. Depletion of resources. War. Collapse. Sound familiar? The Easter Island story is a story for our times.

We too are on an island floating on an endless sea. There are differences, of course. It could be said that Easter Island is tiny and that it was only a matter of time before the resources in such a closed system were used up. But there are parallels between the islanders' attitude towards their environment and our own, and this is the most frightening part of the story.

On an island as small as Easter, it was easy to see the effects of the deforestation as it was taking place. But the inhabitants continued their destructive actions. They probably prayed to their gods to replenish the land so they could continue to rape it, but the gods didn't answer.

And still the trees came down. Whatever one did to alter that ecosystem, the results were reasonably predictable. One could stand on the summit and see almost every point on the island. The person who felled the last tree could see that it was the last tree. Nonetheless, he (or she) still felled it.

This is the really scary part. As our own forests fall to the bulldozers, there are many who are valiantly trying to save them. It is obvious, now that we have satellites showing us the massive deforestation, that there is a serious problem.

And yet our leaders -- and even the majority of individuals -- look on, unconcerned. They appear willing to bulldoze the last trees to build the moai of our time -- technology & development.

Will we have the sense to reconcile our lifestyles with the well-being of our environment, or is the human personality always the same -- as that of the person who felled the last tree?
- Photographer Cliff Wassmann


Edit here is a nice summary...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/20 ... land.shtml

"That protection fell apart in the 1600s. The moai were torn down. Legends talk of a time of hardship, terror and cannibalism. Archaeological evidence includes wooden carvings of emaciated people and the appearance of a new implement - spear tips. Examination of skeletons from that time confirms the violence that took hold in the Island's society. He describes the people of the time as, "at war with themselves."

"There wasn't much left to do except fight over what was left"
Dave Steadman, Florida Museum of Natural History

The civil war coincides with changes in the diet. The Island's bird life seems to have disappeared as does evidence of people eating porpoise and tuna. The wood carvings were made by starving people. A land of plenty had become desperately short of food. Had the population overexploited natural resources? It seems there is a simpler answer - the felling of the last tree.

A parable for the world?

John Flenley's studies of pollen from lakebeds shows Easter Island was once covered with palms. Yet the Dutch in 1722 described an island devoid of trees. The disappearance of tree pollen coincides with the civil war. The society relied on wood to make canoes. Treeless, their ability to fish for food was limited.

"The person who cut down the last tree must have known. They still cut it down"
John Flenley, Massey University, New Zealand

Making moai, too, must have used huge numbers of trees. The statues had been getting more elaborate at that time, which must have depleted the forests ever more rapidly. Flenley believes Easter Island is an amazing example of total deforestation, sparked by obsession. The Islanders' cult of ancestor worship cost many of them their lives. Soil erosion with no trees severely hit farming. And there were no canoes in which to escape. Trapped in a hell of their own making, the Islanders turned on each other. It was a self-inflicted ecological disaster."


Brette:)