Today in Trump's 1st term as President

[philip964]

Kathy Griffin: Trump is 'trying to ruin my life' after photo scandal - CNN
https://apple.news/AsYzPXqYZS_Gnx0fPoSSk8A


Kathy Griffin as the victim. The powerful Trump family trying to destroy her.

Even ISIS has Condemned her for "Cultural Appropriation".

[rotor]

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/politi ... 1706010198

As you read the story of Trump backing out of the Paris Climate Accord be sure to understand the billions and billions of tons of carbon they describe, is a minuscule percent change in the composition of the atmosphere. If there is any change, it is one benefitting plants and other green things. They will all do better with higher than suffocation levels for them of CO2 in the atmosphere.

I believe the main concerns have to do with extreme weather and sea levels.
I've already posted Neil DeGrasse Tyson's comments about climate change on this forum but here it is again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VUPIX7yEOM
he contends that we contribute CO2 about 50 times what occurs naturally,
and then here's somthing from Hawking:
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/0 ... /21903060/

Take your choice...

Let us assume that man caused CO2 generation causes climate change. What is the solution? An energy source that will not generate excess CO2. How do we do that? The U.S. can not be the only source of decreasing CO2 while the rest of the world increases it (China and India). The energy deprivation cost to our citizens would be a disaster. Perhaps the average Chinese might do better but Americans would be destroyed by this change. So where is the non-CO2 energy? Wind, solar, nuclear? The Japanese nuclear plant didn't fare too well after a tsunami. Wind and solar in many studies show that the energy required to produce the actual panels and wind mills and deliver them to the consumer may actually consume more than they create. If they were so good would we need tax credits to support them?
So what is the solution? The holy grail so to speak is figuring out how to harness fusion and perhaps over the next 50 years or so this can be done. It certainly should be where we spend our money. When we have virtually unlimited energy without contaminating results we could move from a fossil fuel society to a clean energy society. In my opinion, for what it is worth on a gun forum, this is the direction we should go. I believe it is something we can achieve, maybe not in my lifetime but somewhere in the future. The climate debate will then be over. I personally believe that climate change is cyclic no matter what and eventually an ice age may be in store for us. Not in my lifetime unless a massive asteroid hits. Remember though, our ultimate energy source is our sun and it will not last forever.

[rotor]

Kathy Griffin emulating herself as an ISIS warrior holding a decapitated head. Is this the way to insure your way to a rejuvenated career? What normal American wants to be looked at as a Jihadist terrorist? Ugh!

[Jusme]

Kathy Griffin: Trump is 'trying to ruin my life' after photo scandal - CNN
https://apple.news/AsYzPXqYZS_Gnx0fPoSSk8A


Kathy Griffin as the victim. The powerful Trump family trying to destroy her.

Even ISIS has Condemned her for "Cultural Appropriation".

These are the funniest things I have ever heard for her. Her lawyer must also be a comedian, according to him, she is only being ostracized because she is a woman.

Hey lady, the secret service contacts everyone, who makes a potential threat against the President. You're not special. Do you need some cheese with that whine?

[philip964]

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/politi ... 1706010198

As you read the story of Trump.......

.So where is the non-CO2 energy? Wind, solar, nuclear? The Japanese nuclear plant didn't fare too well after a tsunami. Wind and solar in many studies show that the energy required to produce the actual panels and wind mills and deliver them to the consumer may actually consume more than they create. If they were so good would we need tax credits to support them?

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, nothing is free and since the anti CO2 guys are picking at nat-s***, I will do the same.

Wind energy slows the rotation of the Earth. ( talk about your epic disaster)

Solar panels are black and darker than the average Earth ground color value, so they will directly heat the Earth. No crazy computer models required to prove this.

Geothermal energy cools the Earths core. Vulcanism is required to maintain an atmosphere. (Think Mars)

[bblhd672]

Kathy Griffin: Trump is 'trying to ruin my life' after photo scandal - CNN
https://apple.news/AsYzPXqYZS_Gnx0fPoSSk8A


Kathy Griffin as the victim. The powerful Trump family trying to destroy her.

Even ISIS has Condemned her for "Cultural Appropriation".

This was no innocent photo shoot gone wrong. Kathy Griffin planned and executed this attack on President Trump and his son. Premeditated and disgusting.
http://www.vulture.com/2016/12/kathy-gr ... trump.html

So I’m happy to deliver beat down to Donald Trump — and also to Barron. You know a lot of comics are going to go hard for Donald, my edge is that I’ll go direct for Barron. I’m going to get in ahead of the game.”

Sign petition asking that Kathy Griffin be arrested for threatening the President of the United States:
http://conservativefighters.com/kathy-griffin-petition/

[philip964]

A tearful but resilient Kathy Griffin vows to tackle President Trump head-on - Los Angeles Times
https://apple.news/AE_CZV-FyQrmL0w0UpikLxQ

Kathy Griffen is not backing down.

[dale blanker]

Please provide source references...
Lot's of folks have posted opinions about the Paris Agreement and/or climate change and that's fine but it would be more helpful if the source(s) of their data/conclusion were provided. There used to be a comprehensive analysis on climate change at epa.gov but I can't find it. I think it said that co2 levels have increased 50+% ppm monthly-average-wise compared to the last 800,000 years, caused mainly by fossil fuels. Does anyone recall this data?

On climate change and what to do about it, I tend to believe people like Tyson and Hawking. Of course they could be wrong but it seems to me that being a little extra conservative about the environment is a good bet anyway. I don't know whether the Paris Agreement is a "good deal" or not for the US but getting the world to agree on something that seems to be worthwhile is a good start.

I think it's neat that Georgetown, TX is going totally wind/solar for energy and that Texas was again the top wind power state with nearly 36 million megawatthours (MWh) of electricity.

[ScottDLS]

Please provide source references...
Lot's of folks have posted opinions about the Paris Agreement and/or climate change and that's fine but it would be more helpful if the source(s) of their data/conclusion were provided. There used to be a comprehensive analysis on climate change at epa.gov but I can't find it. I think it said that co2 levels have increased 50+% ppm monthly-average-wise compared to the last 800,000 years, caused mainly by fossil fuels. Does anyone recall this data?

On climate change and what to do about it, I tend to believe people like Tyson and Hawking. Of course they could be wrong but it seems to me that being a little extra conservative about the environment is a good bet anyway. I don't know whether the Paris Agreement is a "good deal" or not for the US but getting the world to agree on something that seems to be worthwhile is a good start.

I think it's neat that Georgetown, TX is going totally wind/solar for energy and that Texas was again the top wind power state with nearly 36 million megawatthours (MWh) of electricity.

https://townhall.com/columnists/calvinb ... e-n2335536

[ScottDLS]

1. There is no AGW.
2. Even if there were, nobody has proven what effects it will have on the climate, and whether they are harmful.
3. Even if there were, and the effects were bad, the Paris Agreement does nothing useful (-0.17C by 2100)?

But somehow the answer to all threats facing Mankind are to transfer more power over our lives to a centralized international bureaucracy and raise income taxes. That will cure everything from the common cold to the zombie apocalypse.

[philip964]

Please provide source references...
Lot's of folks have posted opinions about the Paris Agreement and/or climate change and that's fine but it would be more helpful if the source(s) of their data/conclusion were provided. There used to be a comprehensive analysis on climate change at epa.gov but I can't find it. I think it said that co2 levels have increased 50+% ppm monthly-average-wise compared to the last 800,000 years, caused mainly by fossil fuels. Does anyone recall this data?
y.

Current value of CO2 in the atmosphere: https://www.co2.earth/ it shows 409 PPM From May.

Here is NASA's web page which has 406 PPM https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/ from April.

So if you believe their data the CO2 has increased by 3 PPM in a month or .0003%

By the way 409 PPM equals .0409% Long time ago it was 4400 PPM (.4400%) and the Earth was around the same temperature. See below.

You will note the CO2 data is all taken from the top of Mona Loa Volcano in Hawaii https://www.volcanodiscovery.com/maunaloa.html Volcano's emit gasses including CO2. https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/vhp/gas.html

I have no information on why the CO2 measuring is done on top of an active volcano that emits CO2 and if this has any effect on the accuracy of the data from 1900 when it wasn't being measured there, as after all we are talking about very tiny amounts of CO2 in the first place.

Here is something on the history of CO2 in the atmosphere: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html

"Over the last 400,000 years the natural upper limit of atmospheric CO2 concentrations is assumed from the ice core data to be about 300 ppm. Other studies using proxy such as plant stomata, however, indicate this may closer to the average value, at least over the last 15,000 years. Today, CO2 concentrations worldwide average about 380 ppm. Compared to former geologic periods, concentrations of CO2 in our atmosphere are still very small and may not have a statistically measurable effect on global temperatures. For example, during the Ordovician Period 460 million years ago CO2 concentrations were 4400 ppm while temperatures then were about the same as they are today.

Do rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations cause increasing global temperatures, or could it be the other way around? This is one of the questions being debated today. Interestingly, CO2 lags an average of about 800 years behind the temperature changes-- confirming that CO2 is not the cause of the temperature increases. One thing is certain-- earth's climate has been warming and cooling on it's own for at least the last 400,000 years, as the data below show. At year 18,000 and counting in our current interglacial vacation from the Ice Age, we may be due-- some say overdue-- for return to another icehouse climate! "

Unfortunately if you remember the last eight years have been under Obama. Trump new budget reduces spending on Earth sciences to get NASA back to exploring space and not worrying about climate change. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... /99227378/ So there has been a lots of money and grants dumped on scientists to proving global warming is happening. Web sites or scientists with differing opinions are hard to find as they don't get any money from governments.

Don't forget the big gorilla in the room no one talks about: THE SUN

[Liberty]

Please don't muddle and confuse our opinions with real facts.

[bblhd672]

Please provide source references...
Lot's of folks have posted opinions about the Paris Agreement and/or climate change and that's fine but it would be more helpful if the source(s) of their data/conclusion were provided. There used to be a comprehensive analysis on climate change at epa.gov but I can't find it. I think it said that co2 levels have increased 50+% ppm monthly-average-wise compared to the last 800,000 years, caused mainly by fossil fuels. Does anyone recall this data?

On climate change and what to do about it, I tend to believe people like Tyson and Hawking. Of course they could be wrong but it seems to me that being a little extra conservative about the environment is a good bet anyway. I don't know whether the Paris Agreement is a "good deal" or not for the US but getting the world to agree on something that seems to be worthwhile is a good start.

I think it's neat that Georgetown, TX is going totally wind/solar for energy and that Texas was again the top wind power state with nearly 36 million megawatthours (MWh) of electricity.

https://twistedconservative.wordpress.c ... he-trolls/

[Bitter Clinger]

Please provide source references...
Lot's of folks have posted opinions about the Paris Agreement and/or climate change and that's fine but it would be more helpful if the source(s) of their data/conclusion were provided. There used to be a comprehensive analysis on climate change at epa.gov but I can't find it. I think it said that co2 levels have increased 50+% ppm monthly-average-wise compared to the last 800,000 years, caused mainly by fossil fuels. Does anyone recall this data?

On climate change and what to do about it, I tend to believe people like Tyson and Hawking. Of course they could be wrong but it seems to me that being a little extra conservative about the environment is a good bet anyway. I don't know whether the Paris Agreement is a "good deal" or not for the US but getting the world to agree on something that seems to be worthwhile is a good start.

I think it's neat that Georgetown, TX is going totally wind/solar for energy and that Texas was again the top wind power state with nearly 36 million megawatthours (MWh) of electricity.

Dale,

You only ever post on political issues and you always present the left wing libtard position. Are you a troll?

If not, show us something to prove you are not. Got a few guns? Let's see some pics. Got your LTC? Let's see your cc rig. Are there any political issues where you ever take a balanced moderate or even a Conservative position? Or are you really just a one trick pony?

[dale blanker]

Please provide source references...
Lot's of folks have posted opinions about the Paris Agreement and/or climate change and that's fine but it would be more helpful if the source(s) of their data/conclusion were provided. There used to be a comprehensive analysis on climate change at epa.gov but I can't find it. I think it said that co2 levels have increased 50+% ppm monthly-average-wise compared to the last 800,000 years, caused mainly by fossil fuels. Does anyone recall this data?

Current value of CO2 in the atmosphere: https://www.co2.earth/ it shows 409 PPM From May.

Here is NASA's web page which has 406 PPM https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/ from April.

Thanks Philip, NASA's web page is very interesting. A link at NASA takes one to the report on National Climate Assessment:
The National Climate Assessment summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future. A team of more than 300 experts guided by a 60-member Federal Advisory Committee produced the report, which was extensively reviewed by the public and experts, including federal agencies and a panel of the National Academy of Sciences.
See: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlig ... w/overview