Why do some take belief in Global Warming as a political issue?

[Sweet Willy]

Man didn't cause the drought.

Glad to enlighten you.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

Way to try and bolster your argument by taking a stance on something that NOBODY IS FUCKING ARGUING WITH. No shit man didn't cause the drought in the 1930's. They removed all the deep rooted grasses that kept the topsoil in place. You know that beautiful thing that wind does in the midwest where it blows through the grasses and it's like waves in the sea? It didn't do that because they poorly farmed the area and all that topsoil just went byebye.

Dust storms made worse by bad agricultural or grazing techniques aren't climate, drought is.

Yes, it was a climate phenomenon, caused by man.

Modeling the Dust Bowl Climate Forcings

By Benjamin Cook — June 2008

Recurrent periods of drought are a common feature of North American climate, often the result of colder than normal sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the eastern tropical Pacific (so-called La Niña conditions). One such drought, the "Dust Bowl" of the 1930s, resulted in widespread crop failure, dust storms, and the displacement of thousands of people.



The Dust Bowl drought was atypical for a North American drought in many ways, most notably the fact that it was centered over the Great Plains rather than in the southwest and was accompanied by large scale dust storms that were unprecedented in the historical record. The dust storms themselves resulted from a combination of dry conditions, poor land use practices, and large scale crop failures that exposed easily erodible bare soil to the strong winds of the Great Plains. Many climate models, however, have difficulty reproducing the precipitation pattern of the Dust Bowl drought using SSTs alone. Could the dust storms themselves explain the anomalous drought?

NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Modeling the Dust Bowl Climate Forcings

 

[Sweet Willy]

The Dust Bowl drought of the 1930s was arguably one of the worst environmental disasters of the 20th century. New computer simulations reveal the whipped-up dust is what made the drought so severe.

Scientists have known that poor land use and natural atmospheric conditions led to the rip-roaring dust storms in the Great Plains in the 1930s. Climate models in the past few years also have revealed the effect of sea surface temperatures on the Dust Bowl.

"What is new and what had not been done before is to work out whether the dust storms from the drought and land use had any impact on the drought," said Richard Seager of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO) in New York.

And they did.

"You had dust storms that were unprecedented in the recent historical record," said lead researcher Benjamin Cook of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. "So it was on the level of dust emissions that nobody in living memory and probably much before that had ever seen."

Using computer simulations, Cook, Seager and Ronald Miller of LDEO found the "black blizzards" exacerbated the drought and pushed it northward into the Great Plains.

The airborne dust particles reflected sunlight back into space, leading to cooler surface temperatures. As temperatures dipped, so did evaporation. "You basically cut off the moisture source to clouds and precipitation," Cook said.

Why the 1930s Dust Bowl Was So Bad | LiveScience

Now.... a few days back, our resident deniers (of just about anything it seems) all lined up to explain that global warming was impossible but global cooling was a real thing that man could do with smoke from fires and such....

Now let's see them line up to contradict themselves.

 

[westwall]

Yes.... clueless fools. That's a good term you have there.

The facts of the dust bowl, the cause and the effects are all a matter of record. Much like "cold sun" defenses, this too will be entertaining.

The dust bowl was a result of poor farming techniques. Period.

What farming practices were responsible for the dustorms, in the same area, of the 1840's and 1850's?

There is no comparison in history to the Dust Bowl. It was a direct result of man clearing the natural grasses and failing to plant cover or crops that would hold the soil.

The 1850s or 40s scope was no comparison.


You are no kind of scientist. You are a political shill.

Ahhh yes, the ever popular "political shill" BS. No, I am an environmental geologist you quack. I have cleaned up more of mans pollution than you ever will with your liberal political BS. I also happen to have rad a LOT of history, something you are clearly unfamiliar with.

Oh well. The libs are responsible for that. Dumb down the population with incompetent teachers and political appointees to the Dept of Education and you can lead the dumb masses around by their noses like Cowman and you.

Science is about questioning the existing paradigms. Not blindly accepting whatever manure the leaders choose to feed you on that particular day to keep you fat, dumb, and ignorant so they can continually take advantage of you.

Political shill my ass, you're the shill here. I am pushing the QUESTION AUTHORITY mantra to the fullest, you bend over and let them pound your butt at the drop of a hat.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Yeah....

I noticed that so far ALL of your positions are out of line with any sort of broad support or consensus of science. Seems you always find yourself having to align with a small handful of "quacks", for lack of a better term.

Takes all kinds I guess. Without a few of you around the rest of us wouldn't know we were correct.

The sun does not get cold.

The dust bowl was a result of poor agriculture practices.

Man has the capacity to alter his environment on a large scale.

 

[daveman]

Man's actions and direct causation of the dust storms and loss of massive amounts of soil, rendering great swaths of the plains barren is a matter of fact.

I can't and won't try to convince you otherwise, but your denials speak to your credibility and it's running awfully low there Mr. "scientist".

How did man make it stop raining? Because, you know, that's what causes drought. No rain.

Didn't say that man caused a drought. Did I?

You weren't very clear, were you?

The dust bowl isn't called "the drought" because it was more than a drought. Droughts happen all the time. Take the natural vegetation up, don't plant cover crops, leave the soil exposed to the wind during this drought, and a drought becomes something entirely different.

Please continue though. I want to make sure you guys thoroughly expose your thoughts on this matter.

Good idea. You could stand some exposure to thoughts.

 

[daveman]

Damning man? I must have missed that part. Can you point out where I "damned" man? No, you can't. You made that up.

Ahem.

Man's actions and direct causation of the dust storms and loss of massive amounts of soil, rendering great swaths of the plains barren is a matter of fact.

And this is "damning" man?

Accepting responsibility and learning from our mistakes is a damnation?

Your statement is a damnation. Careful when you backpedal.

Keep flailing. It's quite amusing.

Yes, people are amused by things they don't understand.

 

[daveman]

I don't doubt that there are forces moving to create some sort or sorts of New World Order(s). Co operations between governments, treaties and efforts to control the direction of man kind is something that has always and will always exist. Are "they" using Global Warming as a tool? "They" use everything as a tool my friend. Everything.

But worrying about what "they" are doing is the idol hobby of ineffective people.

"Idle".

 

[Sweet Willy]

Ahem.

​

And this is "damning" man?

Accepting responsibility and learning from our mistakes is a damnation?

Your statement is a damnation. Careful when you backpedal.

No, it's nowhere close to a damnation. Not anymore than the sun is cold.

dam·na·tion/damˈnāSHən/
Noun:
(in Christian belief) Condemnation to eternal punishment in hell.
Exclamation:
Expressing anger or frustration.

Recognizing that poor farming practices caused problems is not a damnation. Not even close. No wonder you think the sun is rightfully called "cold"

Man's actions and direct causation of the dust storms and loss of massive amounts of soil, rendering great swaths of the plains barren is a matter of fact.

This is not a "damantion" by any stretch of the word.

 

[Sweet Willy]

How did man make it stop raining? Because, you know, that's what causes drought. No rain.

Didn't say that man caused a drought. Did I?

You weren't very clear, were you?

Perhaps not. Let me make this clear: Man did not cause the drought.

 

[daveman]

And this is "damning" man?

Accepting responsibility and learning from our mistakes is a damnation?

Your statement is a damnation. Careful when you backpedal.

No, it's nowhere close to a damnation. Not anymore than the sun is cold.

dam·na·tion/damˈnāSHən/
Noun:
(in Christian belief) Condemnation to eternal punishment in hell.
Exclamation:
Expressing anger or frustration.

Recognizing that poor farming practices caused problems is not a damnation. Not even close. No wonder you think the sun is rightfully called "cold"

Man's actions and direct causation of the dust storms and loss of massive amounts of soil, rendering great swaths of the plains barren is a matter of fact.

This is not a "damantion" by any stretch of the word.

And yet the fact remains that you are indeed blaming man.

You can continue trying to weasel out of it, but it's there in black and white.

 

[daveman]

Didn't say that man caused a drought. Did I?

You weren't very clear, were you?

Perhaps not. Let me make this clear: Man did not cause the drought.

It was probably all the electric lights.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Your statement is a damnation. Careful when you backpedal.

No, it's nowhere close to a damnation. Not anymore than the sun is cold.



Recognizing that poor farming practices caused problems is not a damnation. Not even close. No wonder you think the sun is rightfully called "cold"

Man's actions and direct causation of the dust storms and loss of massive amounts of soil, rendering great swaths of the plains barren is a matter of fact.

This is not a "damantion" by any stretch of the word.

And yet the fact remains that you are indeed blaming man.

You can continue trying to weasel out of it, but it's there in black and white.

I am, in fact, blaming man.

Is it your premise that one can not be "blamed" without being "damned'?

 

[daveman]

No, it's nowhere close to a damnation. Not anymore than the sun is cold.



Recognizing that poor farming practices caused problems is not a damnation. Not even close. No wonder you think the sun is rightfully called "cold"



This is not a "damantion" by any stretch of the word.

And yet the fact remains that you are indeed blaming man.

You can continue trying to weasel out of it, but it's there in black and white.

I am, in fact, blaming man.

Is it your premise that one can not be "blamed" without being "damned'?

You are such a literal little thing, aren't you?

Comes from a lack of imagination.

 

[Sweet Willy]

You weren't very clear, were you?

Perhaps not. Let me make this clear: Man did not cause the drought.

It was probably all the electric lights.

No. They pretty much just light things up.

 

[Sweet Willy]

And yet the fact remains that you are indeed blaming man.

You can continue trying to weasel out of it, but it's there in black and white.

I am, in fact, blaming man.

Is it your premise that one can not be "blamed" without being "damned'?

You are such a literal little thing, aren't you?

Comes from a lack of imagination.

No, it comes from knowing the difference in the truth and absurd exaggeration. Saying that something is man's fault is NOWHERE near damning him for it. That's pure ignorance. Damnation is damnation. When a traffic cop places responsibility for a crash on the person who caused it do you say that he has "damned" the person?

You are being absurd.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Do you think I am ANGRY at poor farmers who didn't know any better? You think I DAMN them for what they did out of ignorance, lack of knowledge? I don't. I don't have to be angry at them or damn them to know that what they did was a tragic mistake that caused a disaster.

You guys only try to frame everything in extremes. The world is a range of things, most neither good or bad, but somewhere in between. This compulsion to assign every little thing to one of two neat little bins is taken to a level of some kind of mental derangement with you guys.

Pull yourselves together for heavens sake.

 

[daveman]

Perhaps not. Let me make this clear: Man did not cause the drought.

It was probably all the electric lights.

No. They pretty much just light things up.

So they can have no effect on climate, then.

Glad you came to your senses.

 

[daveman]

I am, in fact, blaming man.

Is it your premise that one can not be "blamed" without being "damned'?

You are such a literal little thing, aren't you?

Comes from a lack of imagination.

No, it comes from knowing the difference in the truth and absurd exaggeration. Saying that something is man's fault is NOWHERE near damning him for it. That's pure ignorance. Damnation is damnation. When a traffic cop places responsibility for a crash on the person who caused it do you say that he has "damned" the person?

You are being absurd.

Not really. But I'm sure it comforts your little literal mind to feel that way.

 

[Sweet Willy]

It was probably all the electric lights.

No. They pretty much just light things up.

So they can have no effect on climate, then.

Glad you came to your senses.

I never have claimed that lights do have an effect on climate. I am unsure where you get that notion from.

 

[daveman]

You guys only try to frame everything in extremes. The world is a range of things, most neither good or bad, but somewhere in between. This compulsion to assign every little thing to one of two neat little bins is taken to a level of some kind of mental derangement with you guys.

Oh, you mean like declaring that things are either hot or cold, with nothing in between? That there is no relativism? Something hot can't be described as cold when compared to something even hotter?

Okay. I see what you mean.