Is the US headed for 30 year 'mega-drought'

[Old Rocks]

The strangest element of this whole debate, is that the people that have dealt deeply into the subject, and see the evidence for how things are changing, would like nothing better than to see the deniars correct. None of us like what is happening, and what we are seeing in the future. So the scientists are constantly seeking information from the past events, measuring changes to see how fast and in what directions they are changing.

In the meantime, you deniars, rather than seeking also find out what is happening, simply engage in semantics, and denial. And accusations of political intent on the part of the scientists, scientists that come from every nation and political system on this planet. It would be laughable, were you not standing in the way of doing the neccessary things to adapt to the changes.

 

[Crick]

And sad that human cowardice makes them so effective at doing just that.

 

[Billy_Bob]

He has the support of damn near every expert on the planet who are basing their conclusions on thousands of peer reviewed studies working with mountains of evidence. That's what he's got

You, you haven't got shit.

Pseudo Political Science dressed up as real science.. All to deprive millions of electricity. oil based products, medical care and better lives.. Now that is the socialist meme you and old crock espouse.... Your peer review is nothing more than PAL review.. One giant circle jerk of left wits plotting to take power, destroy capitalism where individuals can succeed on their hard work, and its nothing more than shit Communism.. That is what you got! A huge steaming hand full of shit!

 

[Crick]

He has the support of damn near every expert on the planet who are basing their conclusions on thousands of peer reviewed studies working with mountains of evidence. That's what he's got

You, you haven't got shit.

Pseudo Political Science dressed up as real science.. All to deprive millions of electricity. oil based products, medical care and better lives.. Now that is the socialist meme you and old crock espouse.... Your peer review is nothing more than PAL review.. One giant circle jerk of left wits plotting to take power, destroy capitalism where individuals can succeed on their hard work, and its nothing more than shit Communism.. That is what you got! A huge steaming hand full of shit!

You have NO evidence to support ANY of those charges. This is nothing but a meaningless rant. You have no real science on your side. Given that severe lacking, your attacks are far, far more political than scientific. No one is attempting to seize political power or economic power by responding to AGW. The charge of communism does nothing but mark you as a right wing whack job.

Pathetic. Truly, profoundly, pathetic.

 

[SSDD]

He has the support of damn near every expert on the planet who are basing their conclusions on thousands of peer reviewed studies working with mountains of evidence. That's what he's got

You, you haven't got shit.

Pseudo Political Science dressed up as real science.. All to deprive millions of electricity. oil based products, medical care and better lives.. Now that is the socialist meme you and old crock espouse.... Your peer review is nothing more than PAL review.. One giant circle jerk of left wits plotting to take power, destroy capitalism where individuals can succeed on their hard work, and its nothing more than shit Communism.. That is what you got! A huge steaming hand full of shit!

You have NO evidence to support ANY of those charges. This is nothing but a meaningless rant. You have no real science on your side. Given that severe lacking, your attacks are far, far more political than scientific. No one is attempting to seize political power or economic power by responding to AGW. The charge of communism does nothing but mark you as a right wing whack job.

Pathetic. Truly, profoundly, pathetic.

The millions living brutish, short lives in the third world while you enjoy cheap, abundant energy is more than sufficient evidence.

 

[Crick]

The same evidence would convict you of the exact same crime. Do you confess?
My god what an idiot.

 

[SSDD]

The same evidence would convict you of the exact same crime. Do you confess?
My god what an idiot.

It isn't my ideology that is denying them the power to join the industrialized world....I see them as potential customers and want them to begin enjoying the life that is possible for them through cheap available energy and I don't think that any "endangered" species is so important that saving it is worth the suffering and very lives of millions...How about you? Do you deny that greens have blocked project after project that would make energy and the improved living conditions that come with it available to people who are still living without?

 

[Crick]

Regarding your accusation that I am responsible for blocking third world energy projects and that the evidence is that there exist third world-ers short on energy is so circular it should have made you dizzy. Can you really be that stupid?

The environmental movement has acted for and against all manner of actions, projects, legislation and movements. The environmental movement works to protect the environment. Amazing! Plenty of energy projects have been proposed whose environmental costs were high. Whether or not the benefits outweighed the costs was often a matter of personal priorities. Egypt's Aswan dam, you may recall, would have submerged the Temple of Abu Simbel and the statues of Ramses the Great and Lake Nasser, created by the dam, displaced over 100,000 people. And, of course many Americans were suspicious of the project due to the Russian involvement.

How about you identify some of these energy projects that you believe environmentalists have needlessly or erroneously blocked? You're the one with the claim. It's your responsibility to provide evidence.

 

[jc456]

He has the support of damn near every expert on the planet who are basing their conclusions on thousands of peer reviewed studies working with mountains of evidence. That's what he's got

You, you haven't got shit.

Peer review, did i mention that is just plain caca? Again meaningless words from you.

 

[Crick]

Speaking of meaningless words...

The advancements that the human race has made in medicine, electronics, transportation, energy, biology, cosmology, chemistry, nuclear physics and every other branch of science over the last 200 years have been the product of mainstream science practicing the scientific method. When you say that's caca, the only thing demonstrated is your abysmal ignorance.

 

[jc456]

Speaking of meaningless words...

The advancements that the human race has made in medicine, electronics, transportation, energy, biology, cosmology, chemistry, nuclear physics and every other branch of science over the last 200 years have been the product of mainstream science practicing the scientific method. When you say that's caca, the only thing demonstrated is your abysmal ignorance.

And yet in climate science, there is none. Prove me wrong, dispute this

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Dunno about the whole US, probably not, but California seems fuct.

 

[Old Rocks]

Speaking of meaningless words...

The advancements that the human race has made in medicine, electronics, transportation, energy, biology, cosmology, chemistry, nuclear physics and every other branch of science over the last 200 years have been the product of mainstream science practicing the scientific method. When you say that's caca, the only thing demonstrated is your abysmal ignorance.

And yet in climate science, there is none. Prove me wrong, dispute this

Dispute what? And what does the rate of photosynthesis have to do with the fact that we are putting enough GHGs into the atmosphere to disrupt the climate? Also, that is not true for all plants.

 

[jc456]

Speaking of meaningless words...

The advancements that the human race has made in medicine, electronics, transportation, energy, biology, cosmology, chemistry, nuclear physics and every other branch of science over the last 200 years have been the product of mainstream science practicing the scientific method. When you say that's caca, the only thing demonstrated is your abysmal ignorance.

And yet in climate science, there is none. Prove me wrong, dispute this

Dispute what? And what does the rate of photosynthesis have to do with the fact that we are putting enough GHGs into the atmosphere to disrupt the climate? Also, that is not true for all plants.

that adding 120 PPM of CO2 will cause a temperature increase. The chart clearly explains that CO2 levels level off. So provide the experiment.

 

[Old Rocks]

Less Nutritious Grains May Be In Our Future The Salt NPR

In general, the experiments show that crops grow faster when there's more carbon dioxide, and yields are often 10 percent higher, compared with plants in normal atmosphere.

But Myers and his colleagues took a closer look, examining not just the quantity of the harvest, but also its quality.

"What we found were 5 to 10 percent reductions in nutrients like iron, zinc and protein," he says.

Myers isn't sure what's causing this. One theory is that when a plant produces more grain or beans, the trace nutrients get diluted.

No matter what the cause, Myers says the effects could be really significant — and harmful.

Worldwide, about 2 billion people already are getting too little iron and zinc in their diets, and it's damaging their health. Zinc deficiency causes increased child mortality due to infectious diseases, because it prevents the immune system from working properly. Lack of iron increases the death rates of mothers and lowers the IQ of children.

If some of the world's most important crops provide even lower levels of these nutrients in a future, high-CO2 world, Myers says, it's likely to make the problem even worse.

Doesn't look like a lot more CO2 is a plus at all.

 

[Old Rocks]

Speaking of meaningless words...

The advancements that the human race has made in medicine, electronics, transportation, energy, biology, cosmology, chemistry, nuclear physics and every other branch of science over the last 200 years have been the product of mainstream science practicing the scientific method. When you say that's caca, the only thing demonstrated is your abysmal ignorance.

And yet in climate science, there is none. Prove me wrong, dispute this

Dispute what? And what does the rate of photosynthesis have to do with the fact that we are putting enough GHGs into the atmosphere to disrupt the climate? Also, that is not true for all plants.

that adding 120 PPM of CO2 will cause a temperature increase. The chart clearly explains that CO2 levels level off. So provide the experiment.

Egad, where does the chart show the CO2 leveling off? It shows the rate of photosynthesis leveling off, not the rate of CO2.

 

[jc456]

Less Nutritious Grains May Be In Our Future The Salt NPR

In general, the experiments show that crops grow faster when there's more carbon dioxide, and yields are often 10 percent higher, compared with plants in normal atmosphere.

But Myers and his colleagues took a closer look, examining not just the quantity of the harvest, but also its quality.

"What we found were 5 to 10 percent reductions in nutrients like iron, zinc and protein," he says.

Myers isn't sure what's causing this. One theory is that when a plant produces more grain or beans, the trace nutrients get diluted.

No matter what the cause, Myers says the effects could be really significant — and harmful.

Worldwide, about 2 billion people already are getting too little iron and zinc in their diets, and it's damaging their health. Zinc deficiency causes increased child mortality due to infectious diseases, because it prevents the immune system from working properly. Lack of iron increases the death rates of mothers and lowers the IQ of children.

If some of the world's most important crops provide even lower levels of these nutrients in a future, high-CO2 world, Myers says, it's likely to make the problem even worse.

Doesn't look like a lot more CO2 is a plus at all.

Then you should shut down your computer, stop breathing and come back and let us know if it helped.

 

[jc456]

Speaking of meaningless words...

The advancements that the human race has made in medicine, electronics, transportation, energy, biology, cosmology, chemistry, nuclear physics and every other branch of science over the last 200 years have been the product of mainstream science practicing the scientific method. When you say that's caca, the only thing demonstrated is your abysmal ignorance.

And yet in climate science, there is none. Prove me wrong, dispute this

Dispute what? And what does the rate of photosynthesis have to do with the fact that we are putting enough GHGs into the atmosphere to disrupt the climate? Also, that is not true for all plants.

that adding 120 PPM of CO2 will cause a temperature increase. The chart clearly explains that CO2 levels level off. So provide the experiment.

Egad, where does the chart show the CO2 leveling off? It shows the rate of photosynthesis leveling off, not the rate of CO2.

Exactly the rate photosythnesis levels off so no matter how much CO2 increase, the change it is capable of levels off.

Which falls in line with what adding 120PPM of CO2 will do! absolutely nothing. Now prove me wrong.

 

[Old Rocks]

Now, Just Crazy, that is exactly the kind of reply we expect when your silly posts and lies are exposed.

 

[Old Rocks]

You have already been proven wrong by the scientists that have been monitering the climate changes. Lie as much as you want, anybody that has watched the glaciers in the US decline in the last 50 years knows full well that the climate is warming.