Any Suspicious Observers members here?

63 posts / 0 new
Last post
Majoroverkill
Majoroverkill's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2017 - 17:13
Posts: 904
Location: Nevada
HareLantern wrote:
Majoroverkill wrote:
These are questions only you can answer.

No, they were rhetorical questions, and I was asking you, in the hope that by pondering them you might escape your bubble for a moment and gain some perspective. I already know the answers.

I’ll ask again, why do you care so much? It’s seems to me that the issue for you is simply political and perhaps economic(not to mention you are heavily emotionally invested), whereas for myself, and everyone who is concerned about global heating, the issue is existential. Literally everything is at stake.

Majoroverkill wrote:
It’s not my job to prove anything but yours to disprove, in doing so lies the truth.

Actually no, the burden of proof is yours. There is already a strong scientific consensus. It is up to you to falsify that. Especially for something as critically important as this.

Majoroverkill wrote:
I can tell you my findings but what good is that going to do when you already have your answers. Believing in something is not the same as knowing something.

Sounds to me like you’re trying to say that scientific enquiry is based upon faith? Ironic.

Majoroverkill wrote:
It’s not about your right and I’m wrong it’s about finding the truth.

Exactly.

Majoroverkill wrote:
Why do I care so much? I have children like most do.

Oh, you did sort of half answer my question, but with an appeal to emotion.

But tell me, what outcome will be worse for your children, and your grandchildren, and their grandchildren?

Some imaginary globalist conspiracy to drain you of your tax dollars?

Or perhaps the long term effects of global heating will do them far more harm in the long run.

Majoroverkill wrote:
If you watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEWoPzaDmOA it might help if your willing to invest an hour. I am not here to argue with anyone because it wont do any good.

It’s actually doing more harm that good, because by propagating these conspiracy theories you are undermining the political will to do something about this mess.

Majoroverkill wrote:
Can I ask you an honest question? Have you ever tried to disprove Global Warming to find if it was true or just listen to those who tell us its truth.

Yet here you are posting videos of people telling you what to think. And somehow we’re the sheeple?

There’s actually a ton of really good educational scientific content on youtube. Why don’t you watch some of that instead?

Well you seem to have all the answers so there is no arguing with you and the experts. It’s been real, let’s not do it again, mmmkay pumkin. Big Smile

Doug S.

Unheard
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 22 min ago
Joined: 01/16/2019 - 11:38
Posts: 1118
Location: Germany

HareLantern wrote:
Some imaginary globalist conspiracy to drain you of your tax dollars?

This would be a very expensive conspiracy involving 90% of all researchers in this field. At least if I had to be part in a conspiracy, I’d take a serious amount of money Cash .

I prefer to believe they’re doing a solid scientific job. That’s what we pay them for.

Majoroverkill
Majoroverkill's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2017 - 17:13
Posts: 904
Location: Nevada

Doug S.

ChibiM
ChibiM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 1 hour ago
Joined: 05/09/2011 - 10:25
Posts: 6395
Location: Holland

Majoroverkill wrote:
I can see I may have opened up Pandora's box here lol. It's ok because I can't expect anyone who does not spend decades researching this vast subject to understand other then the occasional article or news broadcast they view. With every subject such as this there will always be some PHD, Expert, Professor, Physicist.... with 20 different findings or truths for every subject known. This is one of many of humanities problems and beauties, the ability to agree to disagree no matter what the subject is. In the late words of Lenard Neomi, Fascinating!

It's definitely possible you are in the right direction and most others aren't. 
Many people take the big media for gospel truth, and we know that CNN is a lot of fake news, yet millions of people are using it as their news source. And whatever agenda they are pushing, the average folks, (including myself) take these things for truth. 

I don't say they are consiparacy theories, but the 'wise scientist' can't even come to 1 conclusion, and they don't accept a different viewpoint..  It's fun to see how in the 70's people (the other 'wisest scientists' are talking about a returning ice age, and now global warming.. we are talking about 50 years later.. who knows what will happen in 50 years. But, we only have to trust the 'wisest scientists' that the Media uses to push a narrative, others are just speculators and conspiracy theorists.

People think they are smarter than God or can control nature.. just love how they brand all the scientists with different conclusions as conspiracy theorists or global warming deniers... 

it's the same as kindergarten.... 

 

sb56637
sb56637's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 15 min ago
Joined: 01/08/2010 - 09:29
Posts: 6827
Location: The Light

(This post is not directed at anybody in particular.)

Hi everyone, please carefully avoid all controversial subjects in this thread. Defending a certain side on hot-button social/political/scientific issues won’t change anybody’s mind on this forum, but it absolutely will lead to a nasty argument, so please avoid such topics at all cost. Thanks a lot.

Budget Light Forum ...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

Unheard
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 22 min ago
Joined: 01/16/2019 - 11:38
Posts: 1118
Location: Germany

Climate research has some history, starting with Arrhenius.

https://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf

Keep in mind the current view doesn’t come out of nothing, neither is it especially new. It originates from more than 120 years old studies and has undergone numerous refinements.

I point this out since some posts create an impression of scientists running around like beheaded chickens. Please stop that comedy and concentrate on the facts.

Edit: Found this on the history – https://www.skepticalscience.com/history-climate-science.html

NorthernHarrier
NorthernHarrier's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 8 min ago
Joined: 11/30/2018 - 12:05
Posts: 303
Location: Eastern USA

Majoroverkill wrote:

Excellent, You have chosen to listen to others then do your own research unless you have and I am mistaken. Induced Human climate change is real 2%, That’s it, like it or not those are the facts. The really big question that no one cares or knows about is why are the other planets in our solar system changing as well? Can you answer that? (Global Warming) is a hundred billion dollar industry! Where is the money going? I really am not here to argue with you and if I offended you in any way I apologies. This is a very heavy subject that heats peoples tempers quickly. I am a truth seeker and rarely ever find government funded groups tell the truth when billions of dollars are at stake. So again, I meant no disrespect to you or your intelligence and offer my apologies again.

I, too, am only interested in facts. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report, almost 100% of the warming observed since 1950 has been human-caused. According to NASA, humans have increased the atmospheric CO2 concentration by 47% since the industrial revolution. This has measurable effects on our climate. For a good summary of the science, see, e.g., National Climate Assessment

The other planets in our solar system are changing due to natural causes. Planets have always changed. There is no evidence of a giant financial conspiracy involved in studying climate change.

klrman
klrman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 hours 19 min ago
Joined: 11/07/2016 - 22:44
Posts: 2698
Location: Canada

ChibiM wrote:

just love how they brand all the scientists with different conclusions as conspiracy theorists or global warming deniers... 

it's the same as kindergarten.... 

 

 

yes Thumbs Up 

toddcshoe
toddcshoe's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2018 - 23:49
Posts: 2328
Location: Foley, MO

I gave it 12 post before it got locked down. It’s staying surprisingly civil. Wink

"Everywhere I go, there I am"

hank
hank's picture
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 9301
Location: Berkeley, California

Again, because learning from history is one of the best ways to understand science, if you’re willing to read:

Quote:

The Discovery of Global Warming – A History
http://history.aip.org › climate
The Discovery of Global Warming
February 2019.
A hypertext history of how scientists came to (partly) understand what people are doing to cause climate change.
This Website created by Spencer Weart supplements his much shorter book, which tells the history of climate change research as a single story.

nvanlaar
nvanlaar's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 3 hours ago
Joined: 08/30/2017 - 16:57
Posts: 265
Location: CA, USA

Lightbringer wrote:

I was thinking of a bald guy in black suit who would pile on the pepper to anything he ate.

Nice Fringe reference. Thumbs Up

“Facts don’t care about your feelings.”
~Ben Shapiro

hank
hank's picture
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 9301
Location: Berkeley, California

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2020/09/new-studies-confir...

Quote:

New studies confirm weakening of the Gulf Stream circulation (AMOC)
17 September 2020

Many of the earlier predictions of climate research have now become reality. The world is getting warmer, sea levels are rising faster and faster, and more frequent heat waves, extreme rainfall, devastating wildfires and more severe tropical storms are affecting many millions of people. Now there is growing evidence that another climate forecast is already coming true: the Gulf Stream system in the Atlantic is apparently weakening, with consequences for Europe too….

… the latest generation (CMIP6) of climate models shows one thing: if we continue to heat up our planet, the AMOC will weaken further – by 34 to 45% by 2100. This could bring us dangerously close to the tipping point at which the flow becomes unstable.

Yep, “it’s going to get colder” — in Europe.

Couchmaster
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 1 min ago
Joined: 05/04/2016 - 17:11
Posts: 321
Location: USA

For myself, I have seen it warm up in my lifetime in this area.
Fact – Glaciers are going buh-by.
Fact – The headlines above are old but real.
Fact – majoroverkill notes that there are forces at play we are not aware of.
Fact – There are “theorys of why the North pole moved 20 miles last year, but no factual reason yet.
Fact – The poles have swapped ends several times.

It leads me to believed that there are longer term cycles which us humans are not aware of. Where I live now is a verdant lush forested area that was under 500 feet of solid ice 12,000 years ago (give or take). Where did the ice go? It was all gone before the industrial age.

Regardless, what I do know leads me to believe that we should at least take the easy steps to avoid man made global warming. Look at the car you drive. Is it a hybrid getting 55 mpg? If not, why not. Do you expect that you can ignore it and someone else will pick up your slack? Blame others…the .gov? We can and should, all step up our game as individuals. Toyota Corolla hybrids only cost @$23,000. As individuals we can insulate our houses. Turn off the AC and turn down the heat when needed etc etc.

hank
hank's picture
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 9301
Location: Berkeley, California
Zappaman
Zappaman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 52 min ago
Joined: 01/01/2018 - 23:27
Posts: 499
Location: Kansas

It’s like a game… let’s push it until sb shows up… JUST kidding!!!

Rat hole arguments are a waste of time and of course I (like all here) think a few here are “off” but this isn’t the place to (waste time trying to…) prove them wrong. Great policy and well said sb! Thumbs Up

ZappaMan

Majoroverkill
Majoroverkill's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2017 - 17:13
Posts: 904
Location: Nevada

Doug S.

Majoroverkill
Majoroverkill's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2017 - 17:13
Posts: 904
Location: Nevada

For entertainment and the open minded. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_zfMyzXqfI

Doug S.

hank
hank's picture
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 9301
Location: Berkeley, California

izzat “0bservers” or “Observers”?

Watch out for looialike substitutions in site names, they can misdirect you.

Couchmaster
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 1 min ago
Joined: 05/04/2016 - 17:11
Posts: 321
Location: USA

Heres a good explanation of the suns cyclical effect on the heating/cooling of the planet. https://electroverse.net/analysis-finds-solar-activity-controls-climate-change/

Majoroverkill
Majoroverkill's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2017 - 17:13
Posts: 904
Location: Nevada
Couchmaster wrote:
Heres a good explanation of the suns cyclical effect on the heating/cooling of the planet. https://electroverse.net/analysis-finds-solar-activity-controls-climate-change/

This was a great read, thank you. I see this a lot and especially this year where these sites are being shutdown and I have to ask the question why. Part of the prosses is the earth heating up, the polar caps start to melt. When enough melt occurs it starts to change the salinity and temperatures of the oceans affecting the North Atlantic currant, slows down, which is connected to the jet stream. Fresh water freezes at 32 degrees, seawater at 28.4 degrees. Its like a recipe for disaster. The heat melts the caps, the caps change the salinity and temperatures effecting the flow of the oceans, a hard winter hits and the caps start to grow! This has happened with the last four ice ages. NOAA and NASA are starting to realize this in the last couple of years. Our planet can only heat up so much before it starts to freeze and a very small salinity and temperature change in our oceans is all it takes.

Bibliographic Entry Result
(w/surrounding text) Standardized
Result
Spaulding & Markowitz, Heath Earth Science. Heath, 1994: 195. “The Greenland glacier is about 1,700,000 km2 and up to 3 km in thickness.” < 5.1 × 106 km3
(Greenland)
“The Antarctic glacier covers a larger landmass with an area of about 12.5 million km2 and reaches a thickness of nearly 5 km.” < 62.5 × 106 km3
(Antarctica)
“Greenland.” World Book Encyclopedia. Chicago: World Book, 1999: 325. “It covers 672,000 mi2 (1,740,500 km2) or about 4/5 of the island. The ice caps average over 1 mile (1.6 km) thick, and a thickness of over 2 miles (3.2 km) has been measured.” 2.8 × 106 km3
(Greenland)
“Antarctica.” World Book Encyclopedia. Chicago: World Book, 1999: 532. “Its volume of 7¼ million cubic miles (30 million km3) represents about 70% of the world’s fresh water.” 30 × 106 km3
(Antarctica)
Williams, Richard S. Jr., & Jane G. Ferrigno. Estimated present-day area and volume of glaciers and maximum sea level rise potential. Satellite Image Atlas of Glaciers of the World. US Geological Survey (USGS). “Geographic region: Greenland
Percent: 10.82
Volume: 2,600,000 km3
Percent: 7.9
Maximum sea level rise potential: 6.5 m
Area: 1,736,095 km2” 2.6 × 106 km3
(Greenland)
“Geographic region: Antarctica
Percent: 84.64
Volume: 30,109,800 km3
Percent: 91.49
Maximum sea level rise potential: 73.44 m
Area: 13,586,400 km2” 30.1098 × 106 km3
(Antarctica)
Schultz, Gwen. Ice Age Lost. 1974. 232, 75. “The US geological survey gives these figures: The Greenland ice cap with its volume of 630,000 cubic miles, if melted could yield enough water to maintain the Mississippi river for over 4,700 years.” 2.6 × 106 km3
(Greenland)
“It has been calculated that if Antarctica’s approximately 6,000,000 cubic miles of ice should melt, the level of the oceans all over the world would rise 200 feet.” 25 × 106 km3
(Antarctica)
Denmark/Greenland. Greenland Tourism. Danish Tourist Board. “The ice cap or inland ice covers 1,833,900 square km, equivalent to 85 percent of Greenland’s total area, and extends 2,500 km (1,553 miles) from north to south and up to 1,000 km from east to west. At its center, the ice can be up to 3 km thick, representing 10 percent of the world’s total fresh water reserves. If all the ice were to melt, the world’s oceans would rise seven meters.” < 5.5 × 106 km3
(Greenland)
Erickson, Jon. “Glacial Geology.“1996, 161. “The ice sheet rises nearly 3 miles in places, with an average thickness of over 7,000 feet amounting to about 7 million cubic miles of ice.” 29 × 106 km3
(Antarctica

Doug S.

Unheard
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 22 min ago
Joined: 01/16/2019 - 11:38
Posts: 1118
Location: Germany

Majoroverkill wrote:
I see this a lot and especially this year where these sites are being shutdown and I have to ask the question why.

Question is not why, but by whom ( X-Files music playing ) Silly
NorthernHarrier
NorthernHarrier's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 8 min ago
Joined: 11/30/2018 - 12:05
Posts: 303
Location: Eastern USA

NOAA and NASA scientists knew about recurring ice ages at the time of their inception. The fact that there are recurring ice ages is taught in the high school science curriculum in the USA. However, that doesn’t eliminate the evidence about global warming and the rise of sea levels happening now. Here is an excerpt from a NOAA report by Rebecca Lindsey, posted online in August, 2020:

The global mean water level in the ocean rose by 0.14 inches (3.6 millimeters) per year from 2006–2015, which was 2.5 times the average rate of 0.06 inches (1.4 millimeters) per year throughout most of the twentieth century. By the end of the century, global mean sea level is likely to rise at least one foot (0.3 meters) above 2000 levels, even if greenhouse gas emissions follow a relatively low pathway in coming decades.

The report concludes the sea level rise is accelerating, and notes that eight out of the ten largest cities in the world are in coastal areas. The report also states that a worst case scenario, under a high greenhouse gas emissions regime, would result in a 8.2 foot rise in sea levels above the level in the year 2000.

jp9mm
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 55 min ago
Joined: 03/30/2020 - 12:14
Posts: 186

Global warming can’t exist when the earth is flat. Big Smile

xevious
xevious's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 02/27/2013 - 21:55
Posts: 1841
Location: Hoboken, NJ USA

Unheard wrote:
HareLantern wrote:
Some imaginary globalist conspiracy to drain you of your tax dollars?

This would be a very expensive conspiracy involving 90% of all researchers in this field. At least if I had to be part in a conspiracy, I’d take a serious amount of money Cash .

I prefer to believe they’re doing a solid scientific job. That’s what we pay them for.


TRUTH.
In order for there to be some sort of scientific conspiracy driving some political agenda, it would require so much expense as you say and pretty much impossible to perpetrate consistently. Science is founded on finding truth. Not falsehoods. While some theories end up wrong, vast majority are correct. The one-sided limited response venues of conspiracies pester science like never before. It’s a real shame how fractured societies are becoming over this. The reactive nature of society seems to call for major calamities for the determination of truth, but even now disinfo is so strong that the obvious climate change conditions are STILL being rebuffed with ridiculous falsehoods like “poor forest management.” People of notoriety speaking out of sheer ignorance with the bravado of extreme confidence deludes the gullible masses.
Lightbringer
Lightbringer's picture
Online
Last seen: 0 sec ago
Joined: 08/30/2016 - 14:12
Posts: 12098
Location: nyc

Wellp, there doesn’t have to be any concerted “conspiracy” for science to become politically-driven.

“Money goes where it’s treated best.”

If you have your own theory that “climate change” is based more on sunspots than hyu-mons burning coal, etc., and want to put that to the test, no one’s going to fund you.

If you want a study to prove that 146 varieties of endangered lichen on remote mountaintops around the world will die out as a direct result of “global warming”, people will throw money at you to do it.

So if you want money to do research, and make your mortgage payments, you pick which studies will rake in the bux.

You don’t open an adult bookstore in Amishtown, y’know? Unless you want to go out of business and take the tax write-off or something.

And let’s face it, anyone wanting to show global warming climate change is not purely manmade, is going to be looked at as a “climate assassin”, someone wanting your kids and grandkids to live in a burned-out husk of a planet. Might as well blow secondhand smoke in babies’ faces.

People know who butters their bread.

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

pennzy
pennzy's picture
Online
Last seen: 2 min 52 sec ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2258
Location: United States , Pa.

LB, let me get this straight. Are you saying that money only goes to man made climate change pushers? If so, why would that be? My guess is the fossil fuel industries has the most money to throw at studies like the video back a few posts. That guy has taken millions from Koch. I don’t research this personally but defer to the scientific community to do that for me.

Edit : Not a video, rather an article (post 51)

Lightbringer
Lightbringer's picture
Online
Last seen: 0 sec ago
Joined: 08/30/2016 - 14:12
Posts: 12098
Location: nyc

I’m not saying “only”, but there’s a fairly good chance. Being that it’s “politically expedient” to do so, sure, funding would be way more likely than trying to prove the opposite.

If you’re a reporter throwing hardball questions to your mayor, what do you think your chances would be to get asked to (or allowed into) the next press conference, vs a reporter that lobs those nice softball questions that make him look good.

Again, there doesn’t have to be any conspiracy involved, certainly no membership cards or non-disclosure agreements, but just an awareness of (as mentioned) knowing who butters your bread. Anyone in the industry who’s remotely savvy will know that.

If I worked at a company with a dimwit boss, and always called him out on his dumb-ass decisions, my career-options would be quite limited. On the other hand, if I did my job regardless and even let him take the credit, though I did the exact opposite of what he told me to do, you’d better believe I’d advance faster.

Added: There doesn’t have to be any Grand Conspiracy at the company, just a lick of common sense and political savvy.

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

pennzy
pennzy's picture
Online
Last seen: 2 min 52 sec ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2258
Location: United States , Pa.

I am not getting who the funding money is coming from and what motive they might have to be pushing this theory. Again, it looks to me the existing energy tycoons have the most to gain by funding a few dissenting voices to muddy the waters. Similar to what the tobacco industry did years ago.

Lightbringer
Lightbringer's picture
Online
Last seen: 0 sec ago
Joined: 08/30/2016 - 14:12
Posts: 12098
Location: nyc

Universities, for one.

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

lampliter
lampliter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 42 min ago
Joined: 07/31/2017 - 16:06
Posts: 238
Location: Paradise

It’s all about the magnetic field that encircled the earth.

It's only true if you believe it.

Pages