Just Saying It
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Follow the money trail

5 posters

Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Follow the money trail

Post  Skeptical Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:45 pm


Another voice is added to the other sane ones already proclaiming it is all about money and not science.

A retired professor and glacier expert has publicly declared global warming a good thing. He also refuses to go along with many of his scientific peers who he says have urged him to be in lockstep with former Vice President Al Gore – “the drum major in the parade denouncing global warming as an unmitigated disaster.”

Apparently when science professors retire, they finally get to say what’s really on their mind.

“You will never read or hear any of this from the scientific and political establishments,” Dr. Terry Hughes, professor emeritus of earth sciences and climate change at the University of Maine, told The College Fix. “I’m now retired, so I have no scientific career to protect by spreading lies.”He said he thinks dire global warming predictions are really all about lassoing federal research funding and votes.

http://www.nationalreview.com/phi-beta-cons/396004/retired-climate-professor-admits-global-warming-will-not-destroy-earth-jennifer#!
Skeptical
Skeptical

Posts : 2932
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  BladeRunner Mon Jan 12, 2015 4:42 pm

Shocker!

You mean it's all a pack of lies?

What's actually a shocker is this retired professor is coming clean.....
BladeRunner
BladeRunner

Posts : 1922
Join date : 2012-12-21

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Rusty Houser Mon Jan 12, 2015 5:52 pm

BladeRunner wrote:Shocker!

You mean it's all a pack of lies?

What's actually a shocker is this retired professor is coming clean.....

No, not really. He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it". He's just saying it would be a good thing because it would create jobs to "relocate coastal cities and re-design port facilities" and spur a "science, technology and engineering [...] revolution" as we work to deal with the consequences.

Here's the original article.

http://www.capjournal.com/news/glacier-scientist-global-warming-is-good-not-bad/article_aa90050a-8cb6-11e4-9e64-1728d2da4389.html

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Dr. Evil Mon Jan 12, 2015 7:34 pm

Paquette wrote:
BladeRunner wrote:Shocker!

You mean it's all a pack of lies?

What's actually a shocker is this retired professor is coming clean.....

No, not really. He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it". He's just saying it would be a good thing because it would create jobs to "relocate coastal cities and re-design port facilities" and spur a "science, technology and engineering [...] revolution" as we work to deal with the consequences.

Here's the original article.

http://www.capjournal.com/news/glacier-scientist-global-warming-is-good-not-bad/article_aa90050a-8cb6-11e4-9e64-1728d2da4389.html

Then there's that...

Dr. Evil

Posts : 4233
Join date : 2014-10-01

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Gomezz Adddams Mon Jan 12, 2015 7:53 pm

Paquette wrote:
BladeRunner wrote:Shocker!

You mean it's all a pack of lies?

What's actually a shocker is this retired professor is coming clean.....

No, not really. He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it". He's just saying it would be a good thing because it would create jobs to "relocate coastal cities and re-design port facilities" and spur a "science, technology and engineering [...] revolution" as we work to deal with the consequences.

Here's the original article.

http://www.capjournal.com/news/glacier-scientist-global-warming-is-good-not-bad/article_aa90050a-8cb6-11e4-9e64-1728d2da4389.html

You forgot “It may have given it a nudge,” Hughes said. “But there are so many natural events that swamp that out, for example, the eruption of Vesuvius, or Krakatoa. The industrial revolution was more gradual, over decades.”

It seems to me Hughes feels the effects of warming with be easier to mitigate than if somehow we engineer a reversal and cause a catastrophy like a new ice age.
Gomezz Adddams
Gomezz Adddams

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2012-12-22

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Rusty Houser Mon Jan 12, 2015 8:47 pm

Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Paquette wrote:
BladeRunner wrote:Shocker!

You mean it's all a pack of lies?

What's actually a shocker is this retired professor is coming clean.....

No, not really. He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it". He's just saying it would be a good thing because it would create jobs to "relocate coastal cities and re-design port facilities" and spur a "science, technology and engineering [...] revolution" as we work to deal with the consequences.

Here's the original article.

http://www.capjournal.com/news/glacier-scientist-global-warming-is-good-not-bad/article_aa90050a-8cb6-11e4-9e64-1728d2da4389.html

You forgot  “It may have given it a nudge,” Hughes said. “But there are so many natural events that swamp that out, for example, the eruption of Vesuvius, or Krakatoa. The industrial revolution was more gradual, over decades.”

It seems to me Hughes feels the effects of warming with be easier to mitigate than if somehow we engineer a reversal and cause a catastrophy like a new ice age.

And you forgot to mention that he's from Fort Pierre. Rolling Eyes

No, I didn't quote every single word but I did provide a link to a more complete article so you could tell me what I didn't quote. Rolling Eyes


Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Skeptical Mon Jan 12, 2015 9:28 pm

He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it"

HUMAN ACTIVITY, now that covers a lot of territory.

Considering pound for pound, the comparative impact of CH4 (methane) on climate change is over 20 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period and the largest producer of methane is raising livestock.

What aspects of the human activities do we concentrate on or do we continue to throw money and effort to reduce CO2?
Skeptical
Skeptical

Posts : 2932
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Rusty Houser Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:21 am

Skeptical wrote:
He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it"

HUMAN ACTIVITY, now that covers a lot of territory.

Considering pound for pound, the comparative impact of CH4 (methane) on climate change is over 20 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period and the largest producer of methane is raising livestock.

What aspects of the human activities do we concentrate on or do we continue to throw money and effort to reduce CO2?

Other than your claim about livestock being the largest source of methane, I agree.

Are there more cows, pigs and domestic fowl than the historic numbers of their wild counterparts or were the vast herds of buffalo, elk etc swapped for a relatively equal number of their domestic cousins?  

The good news is that methane is often very easy to capture and is a very valuable commodity. The cost of capturing methane is often more than made up for in it's value as a fuel. Of course some sources are next to impossible to capture, like the methane released from melting permafrost.

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  BladeRunner Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:48 am

Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Paquette wrote:
BladeRunner wrote:Shocker!

You mean it's all a pack of lies?

What's actually a shocker is this retired professor is coming clean.....

No, not really. He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it". He's just saying it would be a good thing because it would create jobs to "relocate coastal cities and re-design port facilities" and spur a "science, technology and engineering [...] revolution" as we work to deal with the consequences.

Here's the original article.

http://www.capjournal.com/news/glacier-scientist-global-warming-is-good-not-bad/article_aa90050a-8cb6-11e4-9e64-1728d2da4389.html

You forgot  “It may have given it a nudge,” Hughes said. “But there are so many natural events that swamp that out, for example, the eruption of Vesuvius, or Krakatoa. The industrial revolution was more gradual, over decades.”

It seems to me Hughes feels the effects of warming with be easier to mitigate than if somehow we engineer a reversal and cause a catastrophy like a new ice age.

Then there's that......
BladeRunner
BladeRunner

Posts : 1922
Join date : 2012-12-21

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Gomezz Adddams Tue Jan 13, 2015 10:00 am

Paquette wrote:
Skeptical wrote:
He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it"

HUMAN ACTIVITY, now that covers a lot of territory.

Considering pound for pound, the comparative impact of CH4 (methane) on climate change is over 20 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period and the largest producer of methane is raising livestock.

What aspects of the human activities do we concentrate on or do we continue to throw money and effort to reduce CO2?

Other than your claim about livestock being the largest source of methane, I agree.

Are there more cows, pigs and domestic fowl than the historic numbers of their wild counterparts or were the vast herds of buffalo, elk etc swapped for a relatively equal number of their domestic cousins?  

The good news is that methane is often very easy to capture and is a very valuable commodity. The cost of capturing methane is often more than made up for in it's value as a fuel. Of course some sources are next to impossible to capture, like the methane released from melting permafrost.

And yet 10.3 billion cubic feet of methane gas was flared in the Bakken oil patch during April 2014 alone.

Gomezz Adddams
Gomezz Adddams

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2012-12-22

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Skeptical Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:08 am

Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Paquette wrote:
Skeptical wrote:
He's saying that global warming is very real and "agrees that human activity probably have something to do with it"

HUMAN ACTIVITY, now that covers a lot of territory.

Considering pound for pound, the comparative impact of CH4 (methane) on climate change is over 20 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period and the largest producer of methane is raising livestock.

What aspects of the human activities do we concentrate on or do we continue to throw money and effort to reduce CO2?

Other than your claim about livestock being the largest source of methane, I agree.

Are there more cows, pigs and domestic fowl than the historic numbers of their wild counterparts or were the vast herds of buffalo, elk etc swapped for a relatively equal number of their domestic cousins?  

The good news is that methane is often very easy to capture and is a very valuable commodity. The cost of capturing methane is often more than made up for in it's value as a fuel. Of course some sources are next to impossible to capture, like the methane released from melting permafrost.

And yet 10.3 billion cubic feet of methane gas was flared in the Bakken oil patch during April 2014 alone.

Reading this made me go back to read my post and my first reaction was did I really say, "Considering pound for pound, the comparative impact of CH4 (methane) on climate change is over 20 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period and the largest producer of methane is raising livestock."

That is the way it came out.  The comment was compiled and condensed by me from separate comments from http://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html

and should have read

"Considering pound for pound, the comparative impact of CH4 (methane) on climate change is over 20 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period and one of the largest producer of methane of human activities is raising livestock."
Skeptical
Skeptical

Posts : 2932
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

Back to top Go down

Follow the money trail Empty Re: Follow the money trail

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum