Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse

Firehouse.com Forum Rules & Guidelines

Forum Rules & Guidelines

Not Permitted or Tolerated:
• Advertising and/or links of commercial, for-profit websites, products, and/or services is not permitted. If you have a need to advertise on Firehouse.com please contact [email protected]
• Fighting/arguing
• Cyber-bullying
• Swearing
• Name-calling and/or personal attacks
• Spamming
• Typing in all CAPS
• “l33t speak” - Substituting characters for letters in an effort to represent a word or phrase. (example: M*****ive)
• Distribution of another person’s personal information, regardless of whether or not said information is public knowledge and whether or not an individual has permission to post said personal information
• Piracy advocation of any kind
• Racist, sexual, hate type defamatory, religious, political, or sexual commentary.
• Multiple forum accounts

Forum Posting Guidelines:

Posts must be on-topic, non-disruptive and relevant to the firefighting community. Post only in a mature and responsible way that contributes to the discussion at hand. Posting relevant information, helpful suggestions and/or constructive criticism is a great way to contribute to the community.

Post in the correct forum and have clear titles for your threads.

Please post in English or provide a translation.

There are moderators and admins who handle these forums with care, do not resort to self-help, instead please utilize the reporting option. Be mature and responsible for yourself and your posts. If you are offended by another member utilize the reporting option. All reported posts will be addressed and dealt with as deemed appropriate by Firehouse.com staff.

Firehouse.com Moderation Process:
Effective immediately, the following moderation process will take effect. User(s) whose posts are determined by Firehouse.com staff to be in violation of any of the rules above will EARN the following reprimand(s) in the moderation process:
1. An initial warning will be issued.
2. A Final Warning will be issued if a user is found to be in violation a second time.
3. A 3-day suspension will be issued if the user continues to break the forum rules.
4. A 45-day suspension will be issued if the user is found to be a habitual rule breaker.
5. Habitual rule breakers that have exhausted all of the above will receive a permanent life-time ban that will be strictly enforced. Reinstatement will not be allowed – there is no appeal process.

Subsequent accounts created in an effort to side-step the rules and moderation process are subject to automatic removal without notice. Firehouse.com reserves the right to expedite the reprimand process for any users as it is deemed necessary. Any user in the moderation process may be required to review and agree to by email the terms and conditions listed above before their account is re-instated (except for those that are banned).

Firehouse.com reserves the right to edit and/or remove any post or member, at any time, for any reason without notice. Firehouse.com also reserves the right to warn, suspend, and/or ban, any member, at any time, for any reason.

Firehouse.com values the active participation we have in our forums. Please ensure your posts are tasteful and tactful. Thank you very much for your cooperation.
See more
See less

Snow and Ice in the South

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • captnjak
    replied
    Originally posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    It took me less than 3 minutes to find those 2 articles, and there were more I could have posted. I could have posted more but I had other things I needed to take care of.

    Funny thing is there are far more scientists out there debunking those whole Global Warming/Climate Change garbage than the left wants to admit. The reality is much of what has been tossed out there is crap, but this has become the cry of the left and they aren't going to give it up even though the most recent data shoots much of it down.
    Don't post more. Just read the ones you already posted.

    Leave a comment:


  • captnjak
    replied
    There's no denying that the rise in temperature has flatlined for about 10-15 years. Too small a sample to draw real conclusions from. It's good news though. Maybe it will continue. If it does, is it because there never was global warming or is it because we've managed to make some small difference?

    Either way, pollution is still bad and clean air is still good. The right wing will have to find a new way to ignore pollution.

    As far as debunking global warming believers goes, it should be real easy. Just look at the average global temperature since records have been kept. Then look at the amount of pollution put into the air. Is there a direct correlation or not? The answer is that there is a direct correlation. This doesn't outright prove cause and effect but it certainly justifies further scientific study. Scientists want that; some politicians do not.

    Leave a comment:


  • LaFireEducator
    replied
    Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
    Two people against hundreds. I'll take the word of hundreds.

    What separates the wheat from the chaff in this instance is the deniers don't bring any real science. They only bring an attempt to discredit established research.

    This is reminiscent of the tactics used to discredit the harmful effects of smoking.
    It took me less than 3 minutes to find those 2 articles, and there were more I could have posted. I could have posted more but I had other things I needed to take care of.

    Funny thing is there are far more scientists out there debunking those whole Global Warming/Climate Change garbage than the left wants to admit. The reality is much of what has been tossed out there is crap, but this has become the cry of the left and they aren't going to give it up even though the most recent data shoots much of it down.

    Leave a comment:


  • scfire86
    replied
    Originally posted by captnjak View Post
    Did you even read the Guardian article you linked to?
    I'm sure he read it. I'm also sure he is clueless about what it said.

    Leave a comment:


  • captnjak
    replied
    Originally posted by FyredUp View Post
    The voice of reason says that there is truth in both sides here. Weather is cyclical. It always has been. But only a fool would believe we can dump unknown quantities of pollutants into the air, water, and Earth and expect no detrimental effect of some sort.
    Is it really that ridiculously simple?

    Yes, it is. But the conservatives can't come out and say pollution is good (their big business supporters would love for them to do this) so they have to attack somewhere else. So they go after scientists. Then they hire their own so-called scientists to prove an already developed conclusion by twisting data. Very effective politics but NOT real science.

    Just another one of the divisive issues (along with gun control, gay marriage, abortion, school prayer, etc) that both parties hide behind while they rob, pillage and plunder this country.

    Leave a comment:


  • captnjak
    replied
    Originally posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    This author must not have gotten the memo.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/eart...cientists.html

    Or this dude:

    http://www.theguardian.com/environme...global-warming


    Funny thing is that we have not had a Cat 3 or greater hurricane make landfall in the US in the past 9 years, and named storms are down. The number of tornados have been decreasing as well.
    Did you even read the Guardian article you linked to? The NASA scientist quoted in the article stated that increased sea ice does not contradict reduced ice cap size OR global warming. She said the trend is toward warmer temperatures and smaller polar ice caps. She also said, as I pointed out earlier, that you can't take a single and local temporary event and draw sweeping conclusions from it (paraphrased).

    No category 3 made landfall in the past 9 years? Making landfall has nothing to do with it. But once again, why the 9 year number? Is it because 10 years ago the record was set for the number of category 5 storms in a single year?

    You continue to take single pieces of data and use them to back up your opinion on this topic. Past 9 years? Category 3? Landfall? Let me guess. Next you'll point out that a category 4 storm hasn't hit Georgia on a Tuesday in over 20 years! Clear evidence that the average global temperature has not risen. Even if it did pollution had nothing to do with it because polluton is actually good and patriotic and very American.

    The number of tornadoes has been decreasing as well? Where did you get this? Everything I saw showed an upward trend steady since over 100 years ago. Are you using a one or two year sample again? Not scientifically valid.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    The voice of reason says that there is truth in both sides here. Weather is cyclical. It always has been. But only a fool would believe we can dump unknown quantities of pollutants into the air, water, and Earth and expect no detrimental effect of some sort.

    Leave a comment:


  • scfire86
    replied
    Originally posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    This author must not have gotten the memo.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/eart...cientists.html

    Or this dude:

    http://www.theguardian.com/environme...global-warming


    Funny thing is that we have not had a Cat 3 or greater hurricane make landfall in the US in the past 9 years, and named storms are down. The number of tornados have been decreasing as well.
    Two people against hundreds. I'll take the word of hundreds.

    What separates the wheat from the chaff in this instance is the deniers don't bring any real science. They only bring an attempt to discredit established research.

    This is reminiscent of the tactics used to discredit the harmful effects of smoking.

    Leave a comment:


  • LaFireEducator
    replied
    Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
    You are delusional or stupid. Either one works.

    NOAA: Past Decade Warmest on Record

    Ice Caps Melting at Unprecedented Rate
    This author must not have gotten the memo.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/eart...cientists.html

    Or this dude:

    http://www.theguardian.com/environme...global-warming


    Funny thing is that we have not had a Cat 3 or greater hurricane make landfall in the US in the past 9 years, and named storms are down. The number of tornados have been decreasing as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • captnjak
    replied
    Originally posted by Bones42 View Post
    Just a personal note....average ocean temp here was colder this past year in my area.
    Yes, but I'm sure you realize it is a global average temperature that is looked at.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bones42
    replied
    Originally posted by captnjak View Post
    ... Average ocean temperature seems to be increasing too, which is much more significant since the oceans pretty much control global climate.
    Just a personal note....average ocean temp here was colder this past year in my area.

    Leave a comment:


  • scfire86
    replied
    Originally posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    1996 was the last year that an increase in global temperatures was recorded.

    The ice caps have increased in size since that time. The number of hurricanes and typhoons have decreased as well as the average intensity since the mid 90's as well. There are several markers that indicate that the period of warming has stopped since the mid-90's.
    You are delusional or stupid. Either one works.

    NOAA: Past Decade Warmest on Record

    Ice Caps Melting at Unprecedented Rate
    Last edited by scfire86; 03-04-2015, 09:19 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • captnjak
    replied
    There were more hurricanes in the 2000's than there were in the 1990's. More in the 90's than the 80's. More in the 80's than the 70's.

    Why 1996? Is it because you did not want to mention that 1995 was tied for the third most active season on record?

    1999 had the most category 4 storms on record.

    September 2002 tied the record for most named storms in any September.

    August 2004 tied the record for most named storms in any August.

    2005 was the most active and costliest season on record. Also the most category 5 storms on record for one year.

    2008 was the fifth most active season on record.

    2010, 2011 and 2012 are tied for the third most active hurricane season on record.

    Everything I posted today was pulled from various weather and climate related web-sites. I'm starting to wonder where some of the other info we are seeing posted comes from.

    Leave a comment:


  • LaFireEducator
    replied
    Originally posted by captnjak View Post
    Furthermore, why 1997? Picking one year as a reference point is unreliable. We can't look at small geographic areas and we can't look at short time periods. Global climate is a long range world wide study. Picking one year and using it to bolster your opinion is not scientifically reliable. When dealing with the scientific method, you don't pick a small amount of data and use it to SUPPORT your opinion; you look at a massive amount of data and use it to FORM an opinion.

    The trend since about 1850, when reliable record keeping began, is toward a warmer average global climate. It has gone up about 1.5 degrees Farenheit since then. The 2000's were warmer as a decade then the 1990's, which were warmer as a decade then the 1980's. Average ocean temperature seems to be increasing too, which is much more significant since the oceans pretty much control global climate.
    1996 was the last year that an increase in global temperatures was recorded.

    The ice caps have increased in size since that time. The number of hurricanes and typhoons have decreased as well as the average intensity since the mid 90's as well. There are several markers that indicate that the period of warming has stopped since the mid-90's.

    Leave a comment:


  • captnjak
    replied
    Originally posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    The line about snow in southern CA was meant as sarcasm.

    The statement about the great "97% Myth" was meant in total seriousness. It refers to a questionnaire that was sent out several years ago with 2 very generic questions regarding the warming of the world since 1800 with No reference at all in the questions to man-made warming or the effects of human activity on global warming. Very few true climatologists replied to the survey, resulting in a very low number of entries into the data pool.

    That is where the magical "97%" number has come from, and it's quite bogus given both the lack of reference to manmade warming or human activity generated warming as well as the very low participation rate by true climatologists.

    I would suggest you do some research yourself, and that way, you can find out how bogus the 97% myth actually is.

    By the way, the earth has cooled since 1997.
    Furthermore, why 1997? Picking one year as a reference point is unreliable. We can't look at small geographic areas and we can't look at short time periods. Global climate is a long range world wide study. Picking one year and using it to bolster your opinion is not scientifically reliable. When dealing with the scientific method, you don't pick a small amount of data and use it to SUPPORT your opinion; you look at a massive amount of data and use it to FORM an opinion.

    The trend since about 1850, when reliable record keeping began, is toward a warmer average global climate. It has gone up about 1.5 degrees Farenheit since then. The 2000's were warmer as a decade then the 1990's, which were warmer as a decade then the 1980's. Average ocean temperature seems to be increasing too, which is much more significant since the oceans pretty much control global climate.

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X