https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1553012051362054145

And evidence is simply gushing out. Head in the sand ....or out?

hokiewolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

GP, I believe that AGW is vastly overstated but it is a useful vehicle to encourage development of new nukes. Nuclear power is safe, highly reliable, inexpensive, pollution-free, and offers vast amounts of power with an emphasis on national security. If fears about AGW drive a nuclear recovery in this country, we will be far better off than if we rely on the unreliable clean energy sources like solar and wind and hoped for progress on batteries. All those technologies and/or materials are currently controlled by the CCP.

---

100% I agree with you on this. Add in hydroelectric as well and you've got some real energy independence

---

What's up with some of these new electric bikes that use carbon, from the air, to keep them charged?

Whether you believe it is an indicator of climate change or not, these images from when lakes shrink back and reveal old places is fascinating.

Just saw this one from Wales.

Drought reveals Welsh village submerged by reservoir in 19th century | CNN Travel

A Tier 2 water shortage has just been announced in the southwest as Lake Mead continues to shrink.

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

With all the American citizens fleeing Ca there shouldn't be a Lake Meade issue and water shortage. Oh, but wait, the illegals (ALIENS) flowing into Ca more than make up for it.

Water usage in CA in the last 20 years has gone down, not up.

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Now that's man-made climate change I can believe.

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catch up

dogplasma said:

---

Water usage in CA in the last 20 years has gone down, not up.

---

I'm sure they have a rather extensive water conservation program...... lawn watering, water fixtures, etc.

My comment was mostly an off-the-cuff comment addressing mostly the fact that Californians are fleeing the radical policies of their State and Local govts ......and also the massive influx of illegal aliens.

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catch up

---

Is this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources?

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catch up

---

Is this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources?

---

both I think. There have been some pattern changes to the snow levels in the Rockies that have affected the Colorado, but I do believe the majority is people living in desert climates trying to maintain non native grasses and plants.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catchIs this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources

---

---

Well, clearly its the latter. But that is why i termed it man-driven climate impact. I don't know if it changes the day-in, day-out climate, but it most certainly impacts the results of the climate. But when you put down that much concreted on a desert, then you're sucking that much water out of the ground, and changing what God has created there....it can't be good.


To me, a similar example -- Hurricane Harvey in Houston. Stalled out and dropped 40+ inches of rain over several days. Terrible flooding. Now, i have no idea if climate change caused the storm. We've always had hurricanes (that area suffered the most deadly ever in Galveston 100 years ago).
And if that area had been left to the swamps and bayous that it was 200 years ago, all that rain would have had recourse. Instead, its now a concrete jungle with development where it just shouldn't be.
So now you have a huge climate impact -- hurricane produces catastrophic flooding in great part because human development destroyed what God intended with run off.

Hey all, what's this fusion development I've heard about? Is this the potential savior for energy?

Sorry I'm late to the parade.... I have spent the last few days digging out from the Ice Age that destroyed us in the late 70's and early 80's and I was damn luck to have survived the complete depletion of the ozone layer that rendered us in worse shape than the world that Mad Max survived in "Beyond Thunderdome."

I guess we will have to watch Kevin Costner's "Waterworld" to figure out how we are going to survive the next "big cash grab" from the left......

I'm not saying that humans aren't impacting the climate. We are. I'm just saying it is such an miniscule amount that Dear Leader bought a multi-million dollar estate on the ocean.

And, the very people that tell us to buy electric vehicles jet around the world, sail around the world and travel in huge SUVs because "they have to be places quickly.."

Wake up people..damn.. just damn. Climate differences occur and have occurred since before man inhabited this planet.

I also remember the Great Barrier Reef was going to be gone and the world's oxygen level was going to be depleted. Reports the last three years are that the Great Barrier Reef is larger now than it was over 100 years ago.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catchIs this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources

---

---

Well, clearly its the latter. But that is why i termed it man-driven climate impact. I don't know if it changes the day-in, day-out climate, but it most certainly impacts the results of the climate. But when you put down that much concreted on a desert, then you're sucking that much water out of the ground, and changing what God has created there....it can't be good.


To me, a similar example -- Hurricane Harvey in Houston. Stalled out and dropped 40+ inches of rain over several days. Terrible flooding. Now, i have no idea if climate change caused the storm. We've always had hurricanes (that area suffered the most deadly ever in Galveston 100 years ago).
And if that area had been left to the swamps and bayous that it was 200 years ago, all that rain would have had recourse. Instead, its now a concrete jungle with development where it just shouldn't be.
So now you have a huge climate impact -- hurricane produces catastrophic flooding in great part because human development destroyed what God intended with run off.

---

I guess that's my question regarding "climate change" arguments. Many arguments discuss the events that cause "catastrophic damage." But, if we build more stuff then there is more stuff to destroy.

I 100% believe that things are changing. I'm not convinced it's all on man. Our planet goes in cycles. Studies that go beyond the last 500-1000 years show this.

I do believe our environment needs help. I'm more worried about trash in our oceans and other waterways. These are the things that bother me. I'm of the opinion that our environment needs a cleansing and that is something we can have a bigger quicker impact on.

---

I'm with you on that. I do think there is a man-made element, but our measurements are somewhat limited in relation to other micro-cycles. And to me, the more immediate threat is the every day water/air we come into contact with.

I went on a mission trip last summer to Honduras. Every part of the country could use a cleanse (when you're poor and trying to get by, trash just doesn't matter as much, i guess)
But on our fun day, we went to this beach resort called La Ensenada. At the entrance, the planned layout was beautiful, with waterways with piers and people stand up paddleboarding with homes on the water, etc.
In reality....when we crossed over these canals, they were clogged with every kind of rubbish you could imagine.

Multiply that across the country, many of the waters serving as sources of drinking / cleaning for people....and you can see why illness, etc.

I do think this is one area where US has really improved. Nowhere near perfect, but our waterways are much cleaner now. I think people want to be able to use them, want to be able to recreate, fish, swim, etc.

The climate change priests and Marxist-stream Media are now saying that global warming is the cause of more children being obese.

Today’s children are 30% less aerobically fit than their parents were at their age, a new study found.

The study points to climate change and rising temperatures adversely affecting childhood obesity, as children spend less time exercising outdoors. pic.twitter.com/26WehoLK9I

— CBS Mornings (@CBSMornings) August 13, 2022

Everything is caused by global warming -- mass illegal immigration invasions, inflation, and the non-existent recession.

These lying communist scum think you will believe anything they say, no matter how preposterous it is. I guess they think everyone has an 80 IQ, like the average Democrat voter that falls for all their garbage.

Apply this "logic" to areas of the country/world with warmer vs colder climates. Are people in Australia obese because it's "too hot" to go outside?? And people in England have almost no obesity because of the cooler climate??

And besides, aren't people (and especially young people) more likely to go outside when there is warmer weather, versus cold weather? Like, you know, all those children out playing baseball and going to the beach in the summer? And don't people generally stay inside more during the fall and winter versus the summer?

But no. Don't think about anything rational or based in reality. Just shut off your brain, and blindly believe the fantasy-land lies being told by your Leftist overlords. Because they always tell the truth about everything -- the 70 genders, drag queen story time, unborn children not being human, this not being a recession, everything.

Drink it up climate change cult members. Any lie to push the communist agenda. Do all of you ride a bike and have solar panels on your house to save us from the global warming?

As far as the real cause of increasing obesity, it' couldn't possibly have anything to do with the vast increase in kids being addicted to video games and technology and the rise of processed unhealthy foods? Nah, never. It's global warming. Because it was never hot in the summer in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. And when it did get hot in the 70s and 80s, all the kids stayed inside because it was too hot. They weren't outside playing basketball and baseball and going to the pool in the summer or anything.

Werewolf said:

---

dogplasma said:

---

Water usage in CA in the last 20 years has gone down, not up.

---

I'm sure they have a rather extensive water conservation program...... lawn watering, water fixtures, etc.

My comment was mostly an off-the-cuff comment addressing mostly the fact that Californians are fleeing the radical policies of their State and Local govts ......and also the massive influx of illegal aliens.

---

Gotcha. I think I misunderstood your point. My bad.

https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/83143/rent-is-becoming-a-crisis-in-the.html

Rent payments not being made as rent climbs

Werewolf said:

---

https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/83143/rent-is-becoming-a-crisis-in-the.html

Rent payments not being made as rent climbs

---

I thought Uncle Gubmn'nt was going to make sure everyone had free cell phones, rent free housing and a nice new car???

Yep BBW..ha

Also; I put this on the wrong thread. My apologies.

Werewolf said:

---

Yep BBW..ha

Also; I put this on the wrong thread. My apologies.

---

Nah... people not paying rent is because of climate change... it's too hot for them to work!!

Not that most of them ever have... LOL...!!!

BBW12OG said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

Yep BBW..ha

Also; I put this on the wrong thread. My apologies.

---

Nah... people not paying rent is because of climate change... it's too hot for them to work!!

Not that most of them ever have... LOL...!!!

---

u have been a roll today! Ha

Wow... you mean someone from the left falsifying documents, forging documents and doing it all to promote an agenda?

Tell me it's not so???

White House climate official -- the notorious Jane Lubchenco -- barred by National Academy of Sciences for 5 years for research misconduct.

https://t.co/kLCCbXcNuy

— Steve Milloy (@JunkScience) August 16, 2022

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catchIs this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources

---

---

Well, clearly its the latter. But that is why i termed it man-driven climate impact. I don't know if it changes the day-in, day-out climate, but it most certainly impacts the results of the climate. But when you put down that much concreted on a desert, then you're sucking that much water out of the ground, and changing what God has created there....it can't be good.


To me, a similar example -- Hurricane Harvey in Houston. Stalled out and dropped 40+ inches of rain over several days. Terrible flooding. Now, i have no idea if climate change caused the storm. We've always had hurricanes (that area suffered the most deadly ever in Galveston 100 years ago).
And if that area had been left to the swamps and bayous that it was 200 years ago, all that rain would have had recourse. Instead, its now a concrete jungle with development where it just shouldn't be.
So now you have a huge climate impact -- hurricane produces catastrophic flooding in great part because human development destroyed what God intended with run off.

---

I guess that's my question regarding "climate change" arguments. Many arguments discuss the events that cause "catastrophic damage." But, if we build more stuff then there is more stuff to destroy.

I 100% believe that things are changing. I'm not convinced it's all on man. Our planet goes in cycles. Studies that go beyond the last 500-1000 years show this.

I do believe our environment needs help. I'm more worried about trash in our oceans and other waterways. These are the things that bother me. I'm of the opinion that our environment needs a cleansing and that is something we can have a bigger quicker impact on.

---

I'm with you on that. I do think there is a man-made element, but our measurements are somewhat limited in relation to other micro-cycles. And to me, the more immediate threat is the every day water/air we come into contact with.

I went on a mission trip last summer to Honduras. Every part of the country could use a cleanse (when you're poor and trying to get by, trash just doesn't matter as much, i guess)
But on our fun day, we went to this beach resort called La Ensenada. At the entrance, the planned layout was beautiful, with waterways with piers and people stand up paddleboarding with homes on the water, etc.
In reality....when we crossed over these canals, they were clogged with every kind of rubbish you could imagine.

Multiply that across the country, many of the waters serving as sources of drinking / cleaning for people....and you can see why illness, etc.

I do think this is one area where US has really improved. Nowhere near perfect, but our waterways are much cleaner now. I think people want to be able to use them, want to be able to recreate, fish, swim, etc.

---

I think most people care about trash all over the place. I remember seeing cigarette buts everywhere, on the streets. That bothered me, immensely. I'm not sure how to deal with this selfish act.

We should have continuous cleaning of our country; however, other countries need to be accountable to their own. Regarding Climate Change, I'm not bought in at all. Too many changes in the name of the crisis for me to… just believe it. Call me simple minded.

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catchIs this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources

---

---

Well, clearly its the latter. But that is why i termed it man-driven climate impact. I don't know if it changes the day-in, day-out climate, but it most certainly impacts the results of the climate. But when you put down that much concreted on a desert, then you're sucking that much water out of the ground, and changing what God has created there....it can't be good.


To me, a similar example -- Hurricane Harvey in Houston. Stalled out and dropped 40+ inches of rain over several days. Terrible flooding. Now, i have no idea if climate change caused the storm. We've always had hurricanes (that area suffered the most deadly ever in Galveston 100 years ago).
And if that area had been left to the swamps and bayous that it was 200 years ago, all that rain would have had recourse. Instead, its now a concrete jungle with development where it just shouldn't be.
So now you have a huge climate impact -- hurricane produces catastrophic flooding in great part because human development destroyed what God intended with run off.

---

I guess that's my question regarding "climate change" arguments. Many arguments discuss the events that cause "catastrophic damage." But, if we build more stuff then there is more stuff to destroy.

I 100% believe that things are changing. I'm not convinced it's all on man. Our planet goes in cycles. Studies that go beyond the last 500-1000 years show this.

I do believe our environment needs help. I'm more worried about trash in our oceans and other waterways. These are the things that bother me. I'm of the opinion that our environment needs a cleansing and that is something we can have a bigger quicker impact on.

---

I'm with you on that. I do think there is a man-made element, but our measurements are somewhat limited in relation to other micro-cycles. And to me, the more immediate threat is the every day water/air we come into contact with.

I went on a mission trip last summer to Honduras. Every part of the country could use a cleanse (when you're poor and trying to get by, trash just doesn't matter as much, i guess)
But on our fun day, we went to this beach resort called La Ensenada. At the entrance, the planned layout was beautiful, with waterways with piers and people stand up paddleboarding with homes on the water, etc.
In reality....when we crossed over these canals, they were clogged with every kind of rubbish you could imagine.

Multiply that across the country, many of the waters serving as sources of drinking / cleaning for people....and you can see why illness, etc.

I do think this is one area where US has really improved. Nowhere near perfect, but our waterways are much cleaner now. I think people want to be able to use them, want to be able to recreate, fish, swim, etc.

---

I think most people care about trash all over the place. I remember seeing cigarette buts everywhere, on the streets. That bothered me, immensely. I'm not sure how to deal with this selfish act.

We should have continuous cleaning of our country; however, other countries need to be accountable to their own. Regarding Climate Change, I'm not bought in at all. Too many changes in the name of the crisis for me to… just believe it. Call me simple minded.

---

I'd amend your 1st para to add the qualifier "in developed countries". As my example about Honduras -- go to poor countries (and away from the beach-front resorts), and you'll see issues

As for climate change, I don't think there is any doubt that it is occurring. Now, is it man affected? Is it too short a period of time to know if it is a usual trend in the billions of years of earth age, or a real issue? I have my opinions, but thats all they are.

But three examples:
1) Tornado alley has shifted from TX/OK/KS -- the plains -- to the Southeast up thru KY, OH, etc. A noticeable tick downwards in the plains and upwards in the SE. But realistically, we only have ~150 years of knowledge about this...so is this just a trend back to the norm, or a blip, or what?

2) Polar Ice cap -- NASA measurements suggest in coverage, thickness, and average ice age, all significant reductions since 1980s. Again, is this a normal cycle over a 40 year period versus the billions of years of earth?

3) Glacier National. Significant glacier reduction since the 1850s, from 130 to 20-something. Other areas have seen similar reduction. Is this a normal trend over hundreds/thousands of years, or has the acceleration been enhanced?

Certainly the doom-n-gloom forecasts of well known tourism spots under the water by 20xx and all that cast a negative view of those who suggest global climate change...but I don't think there is any doubt its occurring.
I'm just not sure if its normal, or enhanced, and while I think we should always consider the environment in all of our legislative and business decisions, that it shouldn't be the overwhelming driver that it sometimes is today.*

**Or if it is, it should be localized -- meaning, I can fully understand why the SW states would apply much more consideration of water table impacts on whether to allow more development to occur, for example, than what authorities in the Carolinas might do.

Quote:

---

Certainly the doom-n-gloom forecasts of well known tourism spots under the water by 20xx and all that cast a negative view of those who suggest global climate change...but I don't think there is any doubt its occurring.

I'm just not sure if its normal, or enhanced, and while I think we should always consider the environment in all of our legislative and business decisions, that it shouldn't be the overwhelming driver that it sometimes is today.*

---

I agree.

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catchIs this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources

---

---

Well, clearly its the latter. But that is why i termed it man-driven climate impact. I don't know if it changes the day-in, day-out climate, but it most certainly impacts the results of the climate. But when you put down that much concreted on a desert, then you're sucking that much water out of the ground, and changing what God has created there....it can't be good.


To me, a similar example -- Hurricane Harvey in Houston. Stalled out and dropped 40+ inches of rain over several days. Terrible flooding. Now, i have no idea if climate change caused the storm. We've always had hurricanes (that area suffered the most deadly ever in Galveston 100 years ago).
And if that area had been left to the swamps and bayous that it was 200 years ago, all that rain would have had recourse. Instead, its now a concrete jungle with development where it just shouldn't be.
So now you have a huge climate impact -- hurricane produces catastrophic flooding in great part because human development destroyed what God intended with run off.

---

I guess that's my question regarding "climate change" arguments. Many arguments discuss the events that cause "catastrophic damage." But, if we build more stuff then there is more stuff to destroy.

I 100% believe that things are changing. I'm not convinced it's all on man. Our planet goes in cycles. Studies that go beyond the last 500-1000 years show this.

I do believe our environment needs help. I'm more worried about trash in our oceans and other waterways. These are the things that bother me. I'm of the opinion that our environment needs a cleansing and that is something we can have a bigger quicker impact on.

---

I'm with you on that. I do think there is a man-made element, but our measurements are somewhat limited in relation to other micro-cycles. And to me, the more immediate threat is the every day water/air we come into contact with.

I went on a mission trip last summer to Honduras. Every part of the country could use a cleanse (when you're poor and trying to get by, trash just doesn't matter as much, i guess)
But on our fun day, we went to this beach resort called La Ensenada. At the entrance, the planned layout was beautiful, with waterways with piers and people stand up paddleboarding with homes on the water, etc.
In reality....when we crossed over these canals, they were clogged with every kind of rubbish you could imagine.

Multiply that across the country, many of the waters serving as sources of drinking / cleaning for people....and you can see why illness, etc.

I do think this is one area where US has really improved. Nowhere near perfect, but our waterways are much cleaner now. I think people want to be able to use them, want to be able to recreate, fish, swim, etc.

---

I think most people care about trash all over the place. I remember seeing cigarette buts everywhere, on the streets. That bothered me, immensely. I'm not sure how to deal with this selfish act.

We should have continuous cleaning of our country; however, other countries need to be accountable to their own. Regarding Climate Change, I'm not bought in at all. Too many changes in the name of the crisis for me to… just believe it. Call me simple minded.

---

I'd amend your 1st para to add the qualifier "in developed countries". As my example about Honduras -- go to poor countries (and away from the beach-front resorts), and you'll see issues

As for climate change, I don't think there is any doubt that it is occurring. Now, is it man affected? Is it too short a period of time to know if it is a usual trend in the billions of years of earth age, or a real issue? I have my opinions, but thats all they are.

But three examples:
1) Tornado alley has shifted from TX/OK/KS -- the plains -- to the Southeast up thru KY, OH, etc. A noticeable tick downwards in the plains and upwards in the SE. But realistically, we only have ~150 years of knowledge about this...so is this just a trend back to the norm, or a blip, or what?

2) Polar Ice cap -- NASA measurements suggest in coverage, thickness, and average ice age, all significant reductions since 1980s. Again, is this a normal cycle over a 40 year period versus the billions of years of earth?

3) Glacier National. Significant glacier reduction since the 1850s, from 130 to 20-something. Other areas have seen similar reduction. Is this a normal trend over hundreds/thousands of years, or has the acceleration been enhanced?

Certainly the doom-n-gloom forecasts of well known tourism spots under the water by 20xx and all that cast a negative view of those who suggest global climate change...but I don't think there is any doubt its occurring.
I'm just not sure if its normal, or enhanced, and while I think we should always consider the environment in all of our legislative and business decisions, that it shouldn't be the overwhelming driver that it sometimes is today.*

**Or if it is, it should be localized -- meaning, I can fully understand why the SW states would apply much more consideration of water table impacts on whether to allow more development to occur, for example, than what authorities in the Carolinas might do.

---

Chem there are studies out there that have come from the polar ice samples that show evidence of these trends going back several hundred thousand years. The trends show we're on the upward end of a warming trend with a cold downfall looming. The problem with current pro "climate change" models are that they only focus on the last few hundred years.

Again as we know, you can shape any study to fit the narrative you want to produce. So, take it for what it's worth.

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

I think most people care about trash all over the place. I remember seeing cigarette buts everywhere, on the streets. That bothered me, immensely. I'm not sure how to deal with this selfish act.

We should have continuous cleaning of our country; however, other countries need to be accountable to their own. Regarding Climate Change, I'm not bought in at all. Too many changes in the name of the crisis for me to… just believe it. Call me simple minded.

---

I'd amend your 1st para to add the qualifier "in developed countries". As my example about Honduras -- go to poor countries (and away from the beach-front resorts), and you'll see issues

As for climate change, I don't think there is any doubt that it is occurring. Well, sure there is doubt. I'm not saying the doubt is correct; nor, am I saying the occurrence is correct. Too many people, on both sides of the position, have perspectives, that are completely plausible.

Now, is it man affected? Is it too short a period of time to know if it is a usual trend in the billions of years of earth age, or a real issue? I have my opinions, but thats all they are.

But three examples:

1) Tornado alley has shifted from TX/OK/KS -- the plains -- to the Southeast up thru KY, OH, etc. A noticeable tick downwards in the plains and upwards in the SE. But realistically, we only have ~150 years of knowledge about this...so is this just a trend back to the norm, or a blip, or what?

2) Polar Ice cap -- NASA measurements suggest in coverage, thickness, and average ice age, all significant reductions since 1980s. Again, is this a normal cycle over a 40 year period versus the billions of years of earth?

3) Glacier National. Significant glacier reduction since the 1850s, from 130 to 20-something. Other areas have seen similar reduction. Is this a normal trend over hundreds/thousands of years, or has the acceleration been enhanced?

Certainly the doom-n-gloom forecasts of well known tourism spots under the water by 20xx and all that cast a negative view of those who suggest global climate change...but I don't think there is any doubt its occurring. See above

I'm just not sure if its normal, or enhanced, and while I think we should always consider the environment in all of our legislative and business decisions, that it shouldn't be the overwhelming driver that it sometimes is today.*

**Or if it is, it should be localized -- meaning, I can fully understand why the SW states would apply much more consideration of water table impacts on whether to allow more development to occur, for example, than what authorities in the Carolinas might do.

---

Chem, for you, a believer that God created all, you believe the earth is about... what? 15K years old. For other people, earth could be millions of years old, right? Your test case just doesn't allow for enough variations of data across the potential number of years that earth has been around.

Yea, I get it.. we have all kinds of analysis using various carbon dating, and other things; however, the facts are still the facts regarding age of earth. We just don't know the real change in climate!!!

I like to look at things from a realistic perspective. We should be (each one of us) good stewards of our environment. That said, an overlay of what a good steward to our environment, from the Federal Government, or, for that matter, a global initiative, is "never' going to be something I can support, in full force...

So, based on a few of your bullet points, above, I think we can can have reasonable debate, as you appear to be thinking the way I think...

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catchIs this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources

---

---

Well, clearly its the latter. But that is why i termed it man-driven climate impact. I don't know if it changes the day-in, day-out climate, but it most certainly impacts the results of the climate. But when you put down that much concreted on a desert, then you're sucking that much water out of the ground, and changing what God has created there....it can't be good.


To me, a similar example -- Hurricane Harvey in Houston. Stalled out and dropped 40+ inches of rain over several days. Terrible flooding. Now, i have no idea if climate change caused the storm. We've always had hurricanes (that area suffered the most deadly ever in Galveston 100 years ago).
And if that area had been left to the swamps and bayous that it was 200 years ago, all that rain would have had recourse. Instead, its now a concrete jungle with development where it just shouldn't be.
So now you have a huge climate impact -- hurricane produces catastrophic flooding in great part because human development destroyed what God intended with run off.

---

I guess that's my question regarding "climate change" arguments. Many arguments discuss the events that cause "catastrophic damage." But, if we build more stuff then there is more stuff to destroy.

I 100% believe that things are changing. I'm not convinced it's all on man. Our planet goes in cycles. Studies that go beyond the last 500-1000 years show this.

I do believe our environment needs help. I'm more worried about trash in our oceans and other waterways. These are the things that bother me. I'm of the opinion that our environment needs a cleansing and that is something we can have a bigger quicker impact on.

---

I'm with you on that. I do think there is a man-made element, but our measurements are somewhat limited in relation to other micro-cycles. And to me, the more immediate threat is the every day water/air we come into contact with.

I went on a mission trip last summer to Honduras. Every part of the country could use a cleanse (when you're poor and trying to get by, trash just doesn't matter as much, i guess)
But on our fun day, we went to this beach resort called La Ensenada. At the entrance, the planned layout was beautiful, with waterways with piers and people stand up paddleboarding with homes on the water, etc.
In reality....when we crossed over these canals, they were clogged with every kind of rubbish you could imagine.

Multiply that across the country, many of the waters serving as sources of drinking / cleaning for people....and you can see why illness, etc.

I do think this is one area where US has really improved. Nowhere near perfect, but our waterways are much cleaner now. I think people want to be able to use them, want to be able to recreate, fish, swim, etc.

---

I think most people care about trash all over the place. I remember seeing cigarette buts everywhere, on the streets. That bothered me, immensely. I'm not sure how to deal with this selfish act.

We should have continuous cleaning of our country; however, other countries need to be accountable to their own. Regarding Climate Change, I'm not bought in at all. Too many changes in the name of the crisis for me to… just believe it. Call me simple minded.

---

I'd amend your 1st para to add the qualifier "in developed countries". As my example about Honduras -- go to poor countries (and away from the beach-front resorts), and you'll see issues

As for climate change, I don't think there is any doubt that it is occurring. Now, is it man affected? Is it too short a period of time to know if it is a usual trend in the billions of years of earth age, or a real issue? I have my opinions, but thats all they are.

But three examples:
1) Tornado alley has shifted from TX/OK/KS -- the plains -- to the Southeast up thru KY, OH, etc. A noticeable tick downwards in the plains and upwards in the SE. But realistically, we only have ~150 years of knowledge about this...so is this just a trend back to the norm, or a blip, or what?

2) Polar Ice cap -- NASA measurements suggest in coverage, thickness, and average ice age, all significant reductions since 1980s. Again, is this a normal cycle over a 40 year period versus the billions of years of earth?

3) Glacier National. Significant glacier reduction since the 1850s, from 130 to 20-something. Other areas have seen similar reduction. Is this a normal trend over hundreds/thousands of years, or has the acceleration been enhanced?

Certainly the doom-n-gloom forecasts of well known tourism spots under the water by 20xx and all that cast a negative view of those who suggest global climate change...but I don't think there is any doubt its occurring.
I'm just not sure if its normal, or enhanced, and while I think we should always consider the environment in all of our legislative and business decisions, that it shouldn't be the overwhelming driver that it sometimes is today.*

**Or if it is, it should be localized -- meaning, I can fully understand why the SW states would apply much more consideration of water table impacts on whether to allow more development to occur, for example, than what authorities in the Carolinas might do.

---

Chem there are studies out there that have come from the polar ice samples that show evidence of these trends going back several hundred thousand years. The trends show we're on the upward end of a warming trend with a cold downfall looming. The problem with current pro "climate change" models are that they only focus on the last few hundred years.

Again as we know, you can shape any study to fit the narrative you want to produce. So, take it for what it's worth.

---

I agree to the extent that our measurements are taking a view of 200 years versus millions.
And that stories can be spun in multiple ways. As I said, I think caution has to be given to creating legislation driven by this data in a vacuum.
But purely my opinion.....you pump out the amount of CO2 we do now with the WW population growth over the past 10, 20, 50 years....it HAS to affect something. Its ultimately a fixed formula of inputs and outputs....and we've drastically changed the amount of inputs.

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

I think most people care about trash all over the place. I remember seeing cigarette buts everywhere, on the streets. That bothered me, immensely. I'm not sure how to deal with this selfish act.

We should have continuous cleaning of our country; however, other countries need to be accountable to their own. Regarding Climate Change, I'm not bought in at all. Too many changes in the name of the crisis for me to… just believe it. Call me simple minded.

---

I'd amend your 1st para to add the qualifier "in developed countries". As my example about Honduras -- go to poor countries (and away from the beach-front resorts), and you'll see issues

As for climate change, I don't think there is any doubt that it is occurring. Well, sure there is doubt. I'm not saying the doubt is correct; nor, am I saying the occurrence is correct. Too many people, on both sides of the position, have perspectives, that are completely plausible.

Now, is it man affected? Is it too short a period of time to know if it is a usual trend in the billions of years of earth age, or a real issue? I have my opinions, but thats all they are.

But three examples:

1) Tornado alley has shifted from TX/OK/KS -- the plains -- to the Southeast up thru KY, OH, etc. A noticeable tick downwards in the plains and upwards in the SE. But realistically, we only have ~150 years of knowledge about this...so is this just a trend back to the norm, or a blip, or what?

2) Polar Ice cap -- NASA measurements suggest in coverage, thickness, and average ice age, all significant reductions since 1980s. Again, is this a normal cycle over a 40 year period versus the billions of years of earth?

3) Glacier National. Significant glacier reduction since the 1850s, from 130 to 20-something. Other areas have seen similar reduction. Is this a normal trend over hundreds/thousands of years, or has the acceleration been enhanced?

Certainly the doom-n-gloom forecasts of well known tourism spots under the water by 20xx and all that cast a negative view of those who suggest global climate change...but I don't think there is any doubt its occurring. See above

I'm just not sure if its normal, or enhanced, and while I think we should always consider the environment in all of our legislative and business decisions, that it shouldn't be the overwhelming driver that it sometimes is today.*

**Or if it is, it should be localized -- meaning, I can fully understand why the SW states would apply much more consideration of water table impacts on whether to allow more development to occur, for example, than what authorities in the Carolinas might do.

---

Chem, for you, a believer that God created all, you believe the earth is about... what? 15K years old. For other people, earth could be millions of years old, right? Your test case just doesn't allow for enough variations of data across the potential number of years that earth has been around.

Yea, I get it.. we have all kinds of analysis using various carbon dating, and other things; however, the facts are still the facts regarding age of earth. We just don't know the real change in climate!!!

I like to look at things from a realistic perspective. We should be (each one of us) good stewards of our environment. That said, an overlay of what a good steward to our environment, from the Federal Government, or, for that matter, a global initiative, is "never' going to be something I can support, in full force...

So, based on a few of your bullet points, above, I think we can can have reasonable debate, as you appear to be thinking the way I think...

---

Or I can believe in creation and still believe the earth to be billions of years old. As a chemist, I trust the aging process (at least at an order of magnitude) that says rocks where I just visited at Linville Falls are x million years old.

Either way --- 15k or 1 billion...i agree with the 2nd half of your point that our recorded history on climate is insignificantly minor. But as I said to Steve -- when you increase population and cars and such so much over the past half century, there has to be an effect. We can all argue about how much it is, and what that does to the environment, but I don't think its going to be a good impact.

I think "reasonable debate" gets turned off because one side pushes the "end of world" mantra, and the other side pushes the "there is no change" mantra, when like most things, its in the middle.

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I've lived in Salt Lake now for 15 years. Much of the western part of the country is desert. You can't keep growing the populations of places like Utah, Arizona and Vegas and not expect there to be issues. It's been my biggest concern about the growth of greater Salt Lake City.

---

Agreed - to me, the most provable man-driven climate impact is development in naturally dry areas.

I've been to Phoenix / Chandler and driven that whole area, and it's just mind numbing how many homes / businesses are there - you just drive on and on amd on, and it is developed. That water / power has to drawn from elsewhere and just seems like will never catchIs this actual climate change, or is it just misuse/mishandling of resources

---

---

Well, clearly its the latter. But that is why i termed it man-driven climate impact. I don't know if it changes the day-in, day-out climate, but it most certainly impacts the results of the climate. But when you put down that much concreted on a desert, then you're sucking that much water out of the ground, and changing what God has created there....it can't be good.


To me, a similar example -- Hurricane Harvey in Houston. Stalled out and dropped 40+ inches of rain over several days. Terrible flooding. Now, i have no idea if climate change caused the storm. We've always had hurricanes (that area suffered the most deadly ever in Galveston 100 years ago).
And if that area had been left to the swamps and bayous that it was 200 years ago, all that rain would have had recourse. Instead, its now a concrete jungle with development where it just shouldn't be.
So now you have a huge climate impact -- hurricane produces catastrophic flooding in great part because human development destroyed what God intended with run off.

---

I guess that's my question regarding "climate change" arguments. Many arguments discuss the events that cause "catastrophic damage." But, if we build more stuff then there is more stuff to destroy.

I 100% believe that things are changing. I'm not convinced it's all on man. Our planet goes in cycles. Studies that go beyond the last 500-1000 years show this.

I do believe our environment needs help. I'm more worried about trash in our oceans and other waterways. These are the things that bother me. I'm of the opinion that our environment needs a cleansing and that is something we can have a bigger quicker impact on.

---

I'm with you on that. I do think there is a man-made element, but our measurements are somewhat limited in relation to other micro-cycles. And to me, the more immediate threat is the every day water/air we come into contact with.

I went on a mission trip last summer to Honduras. Every part of the country could use a cleanse (when you're poor and trying to get by, trash just doesn't matter as much, i guess)
But on our fun day, we went to this beach resort called La Ensenada. At the entrance, the planned layout was beautiful, with waterways with piers and people stand up paddleboarding with homes on the water, etc.
In reality....when we crossed over these canals, they were clogged with every kind of rubbish you could imagine.

Multiply that across the country, many of the waters serving as sources of drinking / cleaning for people....and you can see why illness, etc.

I do think this is one area where US has really improved. Nowhere near perfect, but our waterways are much cleaner now. I think people want to be able to use them, want to be able to recreate, fish, swim, etc.

---

I think most people care about trash all over the place. I remember seeing cigarette buts everywhere, on the streets. That bothered me, immensely. I'm not sure how to deal with this selfish act.

We should have continuous cleaning of our country; however, other countries need to be accountable to their own. Regarding Climate Change, I'm not bought in at all. Too many changes in the name of the crisis for me to… just believe it. Call me simple minded.

---

I'd amend your 1st para to add the qualifier "in developed countries". As my example about Honduras -- go to poor countries (and away from the beach-front resorts), and you'll see issues

As for climate change, I don't think there is any doubt that it is occurring. Now, is it man affected? Is it too short a period of time to know if it is a usual trend in the billions of years of earth age, or a real issue? I have my opinions, but thats all they are.

But three examples:
1) Tornado alley has shifted from TX/OK/KS -- the plains -- to the Southeast up thru KY, OH, etc. A noticeable tick downwards in the plains and upwards in the SE. But realistically, we only have ~150 years of knowledge about this...so is this just a trend back to the norm, or a blip, or what?

2) Polar Ice cap -- NASA measurements suggest in coverage, thickness, and average ice age, all significant reductions since 1980s. Again, is this a normal cycle over a 40 year period versus the billions of years of earth?

3) Glacier National. Significant glacier reduction since the 1850s, from 130 to 20-something. Other areas have seen similar reduction. Is this a normal trend over hundreds/thousands of years, or has the acceleration been enhanced?

Certainly the doom-n-gloom forecasts of well known tourism spots under the water by 20xx and all that cast a negative view of those who suggest global climate change...but I don't think there is any doubt its occurring.
I'm just not sure if its normal, or enhanced, and while I think we should always consider the environment in all of our legislative and business decisions, that it shouldn't be the overwhelming driver that it sometimes is today.*

**Or if it is, it should be localized -- meaning, I can fully understand why the SW states would apply much more consideration of water table impacts on whether to allow more development to occur, for example, than what authorities in the Carolinas might do.

---

Chem there are studies out there that have come from the polar ice samples that show evidence of these trends going back several hundred thousand years. The trends show we're on the upward end of a warming trend with a cold downfall looming. The problem with current pro "climate change" models are that they only focus on the last few hundred years.

Again as we know, you can shape any study to fit the narrative you want to produce. So, take it for what it's worth.

---

I agree to the extent that our measurements are taking a view of 200 years versus millions.
And that stories can be spun in multiple ways. As I said, I think caution has to be given to creating legislation driven by this data in a vacuum.
But purely my opinion.....you pump out the amount of CO2 we do now with the WW population growth over the past 10, 20, 50 years....it HAS to affect something. Its ultimately a fixed formula of inputs and outputs....and we've drastically changed the amount of inputs.

---

Many of the folks that are against this climate change model, agree that there is an effect of man made carbon output, but that the effect on our climate is negligible.

I'm going to use SLC as an example of where my head is at. Air quality is a huge talking point out here. We have a thing called inversion here and it happens because we live in a bowl in the valley. It happens in the winter and it's basically an absence of weather. There is no wind or anything to circulate the air and all the normal pollutants get trapped in the bowl.

When this happens, the air gets mucky and ugly and sticks around for a few days until a weather system comes along and blows it out and clears the air. During this time, the climate change group screams and yells about how big of an issue it is. We get 15-20 days of it per year. The rest of the year is beautiful.

Now, if you talk to folks born and raised here, it was a lot worse in the 70's and 80's when everything was coal burning and cars weren't as clean. They say it could be weeks and sometimes months of crappy air during the winter. But, the population now is 2-3 times what it was at those times.

Manufacturing is cleaner in this country than ever and cars are cleaner than ever, despite a growth in population. Despite all of this in SLC, local government is pushing an inland port that will bring more and more diesel trucks to the valley. So, is it important or not? Or is it only important when the economics matter?

That's why I'm more worried about the trash build up in our environment. That is something we can better control and vastly help our planet we live in.