VillageIdiotSavant’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Local Cooling

  How to bring up this issue tactfully?

  Just jump in I guess, and risk sounding selfish.

  I live in Minnesota.  It's not uncommon for me to have to endure EXTREME temperature variations... as much as a 50 - 70 degree swing in a single day, and as much as 140 degree variation (-40 to + 100) over the course of a year.  Now, I know I am SUPPOSED to be both worried about, and incapable, of handling the .7 degree average increase of the last 100 years, and even more worried about a similar projected.7 degree increase in the next 100 years or so - assuming I can find a way to live to be about 140 years old - but to be frank, I find myself more concerned about the daily and yearly temperature extremes in my immediate neighborhood, than about the barely measurable fractions of single degrees I am supposed to worry about - over the course of the next 2 or 3 lifetimes.  

  I could tell you stories about how on some days, I have to wear near-eskimo-like garb in the early morning, only to have to strip down to short sleeves upon my return home later... the very same DAY!  

  I mean seriously... how can an average guy be expected to survive this, every day. If not for the clothes, the air conditionining, the heat, and all the other inventions we zany humans have come up with over the last few millenia to adapt to our ever changing... local climates, I would have expired long ago.  Instead, through judicious use of these handy inventions, and  the occasional use of my very own brain, I have so far muddled my way through, and have yet to accidentally overheat or freeze me-self to death during one of our frequent - and potentially deadly - local climate extremes.

  Seriously, if our government(s) could do something about leveling out the local temperature extremes here in Minnesota(and everywhere?), I would be far more interested and vested than I find myself able to be in worrying about another potential half degree, imperceptible, GLOBAL average temperature increase.  

  I'm old enough to remember the frigid 70's here in Minnesota - it was not pleasant.  I am also aware enough to know that we (humans) have faced climate crises since the beginning of recorded history (maybe even long before!).  I see little need to manufacture future climate change 'scary stories'.  Those with the urge to nuture their humanitarian capabilities have plenty of freezing/overheated/ and/or starving fellow humans that could use our heating, cooling, and/or water producing /or curtailing technologies - today.  Of course, to save the millions of humans already dying today from climate extremes - will require using much more of what we scary-future protagonists hate the most... the production and use of more, and more... energy. Quite a conundrum.  

  Yes, better to leave be those already suffering from climate extremes today - and invent notions that it will be worse later.  Tsunami's, hurricanes, cylones, droughts, floods, volcanoes, earthquakes - we've seen it all before, and invented quite a few handy mechanisms to predict, preserve, and restore before, during, and after these tragic events.

  Since our history of climate related tragedies is hard to refute, per another of Coby's thinly argued, anti-skeptic talking point articles, we are left to predict an ever-more-terrifying RATE of climate change, as the penultimate bogey-man of our projected future.  As if 300,000 almost instantly dead in our recent tsunami isn't dramatic / scary enough. No, the future is now, folks, and always has been (sort of like hydrogen fuel cells... they're the energy of the future... and always will be).

  That internet thing Al Gore invented has worked out pretty well for many of us. Maybe it's time our idle er, idol Al got to work on inventing the magic energy source to save us all.  Or is Al too busy building up his carbon credit business, now that he has so succesfully built the hype necessary to drive its revenues.

  Coby, sorry, unfortunately, your points intended to counter the skeptics - missed, this target.

  Now I need to go put on some pants.  Its cooled off ten degrees already here, tonight.

  ... Le VidiotOn The problem is not how high the temperature may go, but how fast it is changing posted 2 years, 5 months ago 14 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Relevance of 400K year ice core graphc

  yeah...

  I was almost shocked to see THAT graph in HERE... it just looks so ... so ... scientific, and to be ALMOST of a large enough scale to matter in a 4+ billion year frame of reference.

  This graph just has an insidious way of making me ask myself (and any bring-back-the-colden-days GW zealots I happen to be near):

  "what has been happening so consistently every 100,000 years, for the last half millenia or so?  Was it us... then...?"  

  But this time... this time it's US, I tell you...ignore the silly repeating patterns you see so plainly before your eyes - and pay no attention to that little man behind the green curtain.

  Your post almost came right out and acknowledged the fact that we are not even at the inflection point we've reached - and measured - at least 4 times in our recent, half million year past.... nor how awful things get - cold-wise - for our home planet, once the temperature down-turn begins again.  Its probably best to leave this inconvenient graph out... there is not one aspect of this much larger picture that is helpful to proponents of man-made GW.  

  (I sincerely hope the folks subscribing to the 120 year temperature graph are the same ones making stock picks using the one-minute stock chart view... easy pickings for those of us who appreciate a more rational frame of reference. ) On 'One hundred years is not enough'--Yes it is posted 2 years, 5 months ago 18 Responses