Clusterheadaches.com Message Board


    
      
        Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        New Message Board Archives >> 2006 General Board Posts >> Global warming?
        
(Message started by: forgetfulnot on Jan 25^th, 2006, 11:28am)

Title: Global warming?
Post by forgetfulnot on Jan 25^th, 2006, 11:28am

We know here in Oklahoma clear up to Nebraska was once covered by an ocean. If that is true how could we be causing these minor rises in the ocean? We set at 625' above sea level. If all the land covered ice were to melt 700' thick, we would be high and dry by 425'. And where did that 425'+ of water go? We are having a record setting warm winter in the U.S.,Natural gas has gone from 15.00 to 7.50 per deco-therm, Russia is getting hammered with record setting cold. Global warming? It's a natural thing, we can't control mother nature.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/question473.htm

Lee

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by Ghost on Jan 25^th, 2006, 11:31am

But isnt it fun trying or at least blaming someone for causing it? Got to admit its alot of fun listening to people fight about it. ;;D

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by forgetfulnot on Jan 25^th, 2006, 11:39am

on 01/25/06 at 11:31:03, Ghost wrote:

But isnt it fun trying or at least blaming someone for causing it? Got to admit its alot of fun listening to people fight about it. ;;D

No shit I just love to put freon in my old Honda $75.00 a can black market.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by BobG on Jan 25^th, 2006, 11:42am

The so called warming that is supposedly happening is nothing more than a natural cycle the earth has been going through for millions of years.

If you go back to the news stories of about 20 years ago it was all about the new ice age starting. But, it didn't happen and the so called weather experts ran out of scare stories to write about, so......

they came up with a new term, global warming. That gives them new crap to write about and get don't-have-to-pay'em-back grants from the taxpayers to "study" the earth's warming that will kill us all in just a few short centuries from now.........

unless the weather cools off, of course.

Quote:

We are having a record setting warm winter in the U.S.,Natural gas has gone from 15.00 to 7.50 per deco-therm,

Just heard on the news that because of the warm weather the price of gas is dropping and the gas companies need to raise the price just "because".

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by pattik on Jan 25^th, 2006, 11:59am

If you're interested in this subject and want a good read in novel form, read Michael Crichton's "State of Fear". It's really good, and has his scientific take on the whole fiasco.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by BobG on Jan 25^th, 2006, 12:38pm

on 01/25/06 at 11:59:23, pattik wrote:

If you're interested in this subject and want a good read in novel form, read Michael Crichton's "State of Fear". It's really good, and has his scientific take on the whole fiasco.

This is exactly what I was talking about. Find a topic that scares people, can't be proven one way of the other, makes great headlines, then write about it.

Follow the money!

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by pattik on Jan 25^th, 2006, 12:50pm

on 01/25/06 at 12:38:20, BobG wrote:

Follow the money!

You've got that right. Just to clarify...the book takes a look into how much money is envolved in this issue, especially on the environmentalists' side of things, and it really suggests how underhanded the environmental movement can get.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by floridian on Jan 25^th, 2006, 1:15pm

on 01/25/06 at 12:50:28, pattik wrote:

>> Follow the money.

You've got that right. Just to clarify...the book takes a look into how much money is envolved in this issue, especially on the environmentalists' side of things, and it really suggests how underhanded the environmental movement can get.

What a load of crock! Follow the money and it will take you straight to Exxon, BP, and the other energy companies. The environmental movement's entire budget is chump change compared to the real money that the oil companies toss around. Think about it ... how much have you spent in the last month for gas, oil and electricity, and how much did you donate to an enviromental group? Multiply that by a few billion and you will get an idea of who is really renting Congress and massaging the media.

Speaking of Michael Crichton, didja hear the story about that Costa Rican island that is crawling with dinosaurs??

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by pattik on Jan 25^th, 2006, 1:26pm

on 01/25/06 at 13:15:37, floridian wrote:

Sorry, I don't have the equipment to do pi$$ing matches
;;D
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y71/northcolor/PissingDog_text.jpg

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by Ghost on Jan 25^th, 2006, 1:33pm

[smiley=spit.gif]
Sorry slipped

[smiley=crackup.gif] [smiley=crackup.gif]

Some one quick pass me some popcorn its a good show about to start!!!!

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by BobG on Jan 25^th, 2006, 4:26pm

on 01/25/06 at 13:15:37, floridian wrote:

What a load of crock! Follow the money and it will take you straight to Exxon, BP, and the other energy companies.

Yep. And it will also lead right to big headlines in the newspapers. Big headlines are ONLY to get someone to put down money to buy the paper. It has nothing to do with 'news'. Buy the paper that is full of advertisements and then go shopping. Spread the money around. It will also lead to TV news and documentries that tell you nothing but keep you in your chair during the commercials. College professors write about it so they can "be published" which leads to higher paychecks. Global warming is a gold mine.

Quote:

Just to clarify...the book takes a look into how much money is envolved in this issue,

Good example..........make money selling a book about the money involved in a non-issue.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by echo on Jan 25^th, 2006, 4:47pm

on 01/25/06 at 11:28:33, forgetfulnot wrote:

...where did that 425'+ of water go? ...Lee

It is presently sitting on store shelves cleverly
disguised as plastic water bottles, soda cans, processed foods. Another place it can be found would be hanging around bath houses and toilets.

Glad I was here to help

PS - I have a wee bit in my bladder I'm about to dispense of in the aforementioned toilet.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by pattik on Jan 25^th, 2006, 4:52pm

on 01/25/06 at 16:26:39, BobG wrote:

Good example..........make money selling a book about the money involved in a non-issue.

Bob, some of us actually read books from the library

FOR FREE ;)

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by floridian on Jan 25^th, 2006, 5:07pm

on 01/25/06 at 16:26:39, BobG wrote:

College professors write about it so they can "be published" which leads to higher paychecks. Global warming is a gold mine.

Bob - I'm guessing you've never been a professor, but have read something about it?

Some schools have a 'publish or perish' policy. But that typically applies to all faculty - not just climatologists. And nothing in the policy gives an incentive to publish on a given topic, from a particular perspective, or to come to a particular conclusion. To get an article past a peer review board, a person needs data, neeeds to analyze it, needs to justify their conclusions. If anything, that creates an incentive to write about something non-controversial, like the spatio-temporal characteristics of rainfall associated with hurricane Fred.

Most professors are not out to get rich, (and the majority of those who are are in the business school). Global warming isn't a gold-mine for academics; its a mine field.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by Charlie on Jan 25^th, 2006, 5:13pm

No news is good news. Nothing but good news allowed unless they can sell drugs to cure it.
The environment makes the news only when someone forgets a payment or two. http://www.schildersmilies.de/schilder/itsok.gif

Charlie

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by forgetfulnot on Jan 25^th, 2006, 6:29pm

on 01/25/06 at 17:13:33, Charlie wrote:

;;D

Lee

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by stevegeebe on Jan 25^th, 2006, 7:36pm

Lee...I'm glad that we, down here, don't have to worry about such things as rising sea levels. Ain't nothing to do about it anyway..really.

About the natural gas costs...don't worry, we'll just send it up until there ain't no more.

Sorry I seem so bitter...I just am.

Underware on backwards for easy access.

Steve G

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by Opus on Jan 25^th, 2006, 8:47pm

<rant>
With all the excitement about CO2 and how we are destroying ourselves, environmentalist forgot to look at other causes. Such as a undersea volcano (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/05/040527235943.htm) is melting the Antarctica sea ice, and the fact that the Sun is getting hotter (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html) every year. Actually they never tell you that there is no proof that CO2 causes global warming. (http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=4)

</rant>

Opus/Paul

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by BobG on Jan 25^th, 2006, 9:02pm

on 01/25/06 at 17:07:31, floridian wrote:

Bob - I'm guessing you've never been a professor,

Most professors are not out to get rich, (and the majority of those who are are in the business school). Global warming isn't a gold-mine for academics; its a mine field.

No, I have never been a professor. Never had an interest in that type of work.
It may be true that most professors are not out to get rich but I think I can safely say none of them are out to earn as little as possible. Being 'published' looks good on the resume. A good resume means a paycheck. A better resume with 'published author' on it means a better paycheck.

on 01/25/06 at 16:52:51, pattik wrote:

Bob, some of us actually read books from the library

FOR FREE ;)

Very true. But, that book did not get into the library for free. Somebody had to pay for it.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by forgetfulnot on Jan 25^th, 2006, 9:55pm

on 01/25/06 at 19:36:23, stevegeebe wrote:

If your not concerned about rising water?

We produce enough natural gas to blow Louisiana back where it should be, not to be a snot about it.

Lee

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by forgetfulnot on Jan 25^th, 2006, 10:01pm

on 01/25/06 at 16:47:52, echo wrote:

[smiley=crackup.gif]

Lee

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by BobG on Jan 25^th, 2006, 10:02pm

OK may have a bunch of gas and LA may have the biggest refiners but soon we can forget about OK and LA (and TX). Canada just opened the largest oilsand mine in the world. Cheap gas and oil. YeeHaa, order your new Expedition now before Ford folds.

Can we say "We love you Canada".

And speaking of Canada, where's Margi?

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by forgetfulnot on Jan 25^th, 2006, 10:18pm

on 01/25/06 at 22:02:15, BobG wrote:

Your right again Bob, Magie may become the energy czar of Canada. But she is a reasonable person and will accept our US $ no problemo. There is a certain problem with extracting all the goodies from that sand. It might just require American technology to do it , in an efficient manner. Could be a win win deal. Then we can sink LA, half of Texas and most major cities on the east and west coasts, if your a believer.....................

Lee

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by BobG on Jan 25^th, 2006, 10:25pm

That sand has the potential to be the biggest oil supply in the world. I think Margi would be great as head honcho. Just think about it. A women as the most powerful oil barron in the world. That would really piss off the Arabs. ;;D

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by forgetfulnot on Jan 25^th, 2006, 11:09pm

Run for office Margie we are behind/ahead of you.

;;D

Lee

Title: Re:
Post by floridian on Jan 26^th, 2006, 8:17am

Quote:

The scientific opinion on climate change, as expressed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and explicitly endorsed by the national science academies of the G8 nations, is that the average global temperature has risen 0.6 ± 0.2 °C since the late 19th century, and that it is likely that "most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities" [1]. A small minority of qualified scientists contest the view that humanity's actions have played a significant role in increasing recent temperatures.

You can't trust the large majority of climatologists and those National Academies of Science in the 8 most advanced nations.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by seasonalboomer on Jan 26^th, 2006, 8:59am

I find the argument interesting inasmuch as there seems to be a growing need to come up with even more compelling reasons to treat the planet and the environment better. World cataclysm does bring the bar up to about the highest level -- when the argument might work better if it was lowered to those principles that almost everyone can agree on.

Back in the 70's the whole "ecology" thing was wrapped around concepts we could all grab a hold of. Things like out of control smog, litter, garbage, poisons in the water. Now, unless we're banging the drum for world cataclysm no one listens.

Many naturally occuring disasters have nothing to do with man's activities but occur and affect man regardless. Things like shifting deserts, tornadoes, tsunamis, volcanoes, earthquakes, meteorites, mini-ice-ages, etc... all will happen and have had effects far greater than a 0.2 degree shift in temps since sometime in the 19th century. We've been fooled into believing that anything bad that can happen to us is able to somehow be controlled. What hubris! In the end shit happens -- and is more likely to happen if you want to plant millions of your population along the coast of an ocean, or at the base of a volcano, or along a fault line, or wherever it seems our society likes to congregate.

Kind of makes us like moth's to the flame in my opinion.

Does it mean we do nothing? No. It means we have to go back to a point where we can do things that make difference. Where we abhor the idea that everything is "all or nothing". There are far more things to agree on than there are to lay down and die for.

my 2 cents for today.

scott

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by floridian on Jan 26^th, 2006, 9:25am

Some good points, boomer. But recognizing that humans are contributing to global warming doesn't require an 'end of the world' scenario. Its more likely that sea level will rise a few feet in the next century, that droughts and severe weather events will be more common - these are not new things, not cataclysmic, but undesireable none the less.

I think the real problem with global warming is getting people to admit that what they do has any effect on others - which then creates an ethical/legal requirement for them to change.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by seasonalboomer on Jan 26^th, 2006, 9:34am

You're right Flo. But getting others to understand that what they do affects others around them, in a world where using the two-way radio feature on a cell phone in the middle of a restaurant, or speaking to the movie screen at the theatre during the movie, or countless other examples of how utterly ignorant are of others around them seems to fall into the category of "not bloody likely".

I was travelling recently and sitting on the plane waiting to pull from the gate a man was discussing on his cell phone how he was going to be firing a colleague of his, loud as if ther was no one around him. All I could think of is how bloody sad for the poor sucker who's about to be canned. Maybe he deserved it, but he certainly deserved the respect of not having a dozen people on a place hear about it first.

It's at all levels and the ignorance is pervasive. No longer is it just fidgety kids kicking the back of a neighbors chair because they haven't learned there's someone sitting up there, but it's adults from all walks of life.

So what does that mean for the idea that what I'm doing in my backyard might seep down into someone else's yard. Another daily example that probably illustrates the whole point better than anything. Have you watched how people blow leaves into the street as car's go by? Sending the leaves off to "somewhere else". That is the "poster" for today's view of ecology.

Scott

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by stevegeebe on Jan 26^th, 2006, 10:30pm

If you were a space explorer and you went by a planet which displayed large amounts of methane in the atmosphere, you would say that it is extreemely likely that life exists on that planet.

Check out what methane does in the upper layers of the ozone.

Everybody stop farting.

The life on this planet makes the atmosphere that we exist within.

To think we can change or redirect the outcome exemplifies our level of hubris.

Oh bla dee..Oh bla daa....

Steve G

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by BobG on Jan 26^th, 2006, 11:13pm

on 01/26/06 at 22:30:55, stevegeebe wrote:

Check out what methane does in the upper layers of the ozone.

Everybody stop farting.

Oh bla dee..Oh bla daa....

Steve G

The newspaper today said that over-the-counter inhalers for asthma sufferers are being banned. The CFC propellant is so bad in them that our atmosphere as we know it today will be totally destroyed in just 28.7 bazillion laboratory rat years from now.

These OTC inhalers are used mostly by the breathless folks that can’t afford the high priced prescription inhalers.
Hmmmm…..Cows can’t fart and poor asthmatics be damned.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by floridian on Jan 27^th, 2006, 10:38am

The FDA is stripping Primatene mist of its "essential use" status. You can blame CFCs (which were mentioned) but the real reason is that the FDA doesn't want this to be an OTC med. If they thought it was necessary, they would come up with a plan to allow the product to be sold while an alternative carrier was developed - thats what they did with prescription albuterol.

Quote:

An advisory panel voted 11-7 Tuesday to recommend that the Food and Drug Administration remove the "essential use" status that Primatene Mist and other similar nonprescription inhalers require to be sold, spokeswoman Laura Alvey said. Final revocation of that status would mean a de facto ban on their sale.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002760210_inhalers25.html

Quote:

"It helps open the airways but only a little bit, it makes people feel a lot better than they very often are," said Dr. Albert Huber.

However, Primatene is designed only for limited use and some patients may use it more than they should, which can lead to problems.

"It can speed up your heart [rate], your blood pressure. [It] makes you feel very, very nervous, and it has a lot of actions around the body," Huber explained.

Dr. Huber said having these products in stores allows patients to incorrectly self medicate, when they should be getting professional help.

"There's no question about it's effectiveness, but used in an unsupervised way, the entire public is at risk, and the FDA is well within it's bounds," he said.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by forgetfulnot on Jan 27^th, 2006, 12:57pm

"There's no question about it's effectiveness, but used in an unsupervised way, the entire public is at risk, and the FDA is well within it's bounds," he said. "

The entire public is at risk? ::)

Lee

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by TomM on Jan 27^th, 2006, 12:58pm

Dubya on global earth crust warming....

http://www.transbuddha.com/mediaHolder.php?id=1147

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by floridian on Jan 27^th, 2006, 1:26pm

on 01/27/06 at 12:57:14, forgetfulnot wrote:

The entire public is at risk? ::)

Lee

No, but many docs think that way.

I am more liberal/libertarian when it comes to issues of medical freedom. But most regulators are not.

Dubya on global earth crust warming.... would be funny, if it weren't so close to the truth. Part of the Republican war on science: http://www.waronscience.com

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by imnotbub on Jan 27^th, 2006, 3:15pm

The thought that Primatene could get pulled off the market amazes me. The public is at risk. HA. Can anyone say cigarettes? I knew you could. ( No big money for the govt. in Primatene I guess)

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by BobG on Jan 27^th, 2006, 7:30pm

"It helps open the airways but only a little bit, it makes people feel a lot better than they very often are," said Dr. Albert Huber. So do cigarettes and alcohol. Dr Huber is a friggin’ idiot.

However, Primatene is designed only for limited use (So is Aspirin) and some patients may use it more than they should, which can lead to problems. And if they don’t use it they can’t breath. Suffocate and die, problem solved.

"It can speed up your heart [rate], your blood pressure. [It] makes you feel very, very nervous, and it has a lot of actions around the body," Huber explained. When you can’t breathe it makes you nervous. Opening the airway and breathing helps make the nervousness go away.

Dr. Huber said having these products in stores allows patients to incorrectly self medicate, (like using cough syrup or Nyquil) when they should be getting professional help. Hey Doc Al, they don’t have the money, butthead. They don’t have insurance. That is why they are trying to help themselves. Get it? Ya dumb-fuck..

"There's no question about it's effectiveness, but used in an unsupervised way, the entire public is at risk, and the FDA is well within it's bounds," he said. It’s effective therefore it should be banned and the poor people can just go without any help.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by Jonny on Jan 27^th, 2006, 7:52pm

GO Bob G!!!

As kids my older and younger brother would have died many times without it, I literaly had to run and get it because one or the other were having a sever asthma attack.

"Open the air way just a little bit"....if that was the case I would not have any brothers!!!....Dr Ass-hole is a fucking moron!!!!

When you inhale Primatene what comes out on the exhale that is going to hurt anything?

Dr Ass-hole is a QUACK!!!!

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by floridian on Jan 27^th, 2006, 8:59pm

I hear you on that - but who said the FDA was rational. Tryptophan is another case where the DoctorKnowsBest people took over. A batch of the amino acid tryptophan got contaminated and some people became ill, and some of them died. So the FDA bans tryptophan. Good thing that they didn't apply that logic to hamburger, or potato salad, or cheese, all of which are sometimes contaminated and make people sick, even killing some people.

The real issue was using tryptophan to boost serotonin without a doctor. Self medicating and getting better, rather than taking prescription medicines? Outrageous!! Of course, a few months after banning the amino acid for general use, the FDA decided that tryptophan is safe enough to be added to baby formula, its the adults who need protection from the evils of the big T.

(side note: 5-htp is not identical to tryptophan, and the 'legal' tryptophan that is available in the US is imported for veterinary purposes, and the price is jacked up when it is remarketed to people.

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by Jonny on Jan 27^th, 2006, 9:09pm

on 01/27/06 at 20:59:30, floridian wrote:

I hear you on that - but who said the FDA was rational.

Good point ;;D

Title: Re: Global warming?
Post by kcopelin on Jan 28^th, 2006, 9:06am

Clusterheads are responsible in large part for global warming. This is because we so often use alternative or herbal remedies which cause flatuence (gas) thus increasing the amount of methane in the atmosphere. I for one feel really bad about this [smiley=nono.gif]and have decided to never fart again as long as I live.
On the other hand, there may be grant money in this-Clemson University got big bucks to study cow farts and how to harness the methane. Perhaps OUCH could do the same....
kathy