The sun is blank, NASA data shows it to be dimming

Go for it , sounds cool to me

 

I don't care if he was Damien, the Son of Satan. The fact remains all NASA science is overseen by NASA leadership and peer-reviewed both inside and outside NASA. You are trying to convict the science through guilt-by-association. Fine. Go ahead. Like I said, most of the problems will happen well after we're dead, so why do you give a ****?

 

I am. I'm still researching and don't plan to retire for another 2-3 years so probably won't buy for another 1-2 years. It'll be cash on the barrel-head when I do. The biggest mistake most retirees make is to retire with debt.

 

$$$

Take for example new Zealand they are not lowering their emissions , they are buying carbon credits and can't afford them with the Paris Accord..


Germany Electric bills are three times higher then the USA ..

I could go on and on why do you want to hurt poor people for this boon doggle of relying on junk science , we just don't Know how much man causes it and how much is natural variation..

 

It needs the right amount

Too little we have snowball earth too much and the tropics are uninhabitable

 

Agreed, it's all about the money. Money influences politics and here we are.

The "hurt the poor" excuse is a common one from the Left. It's the one they used to cancel the remainder of our Moon missions and to kill the Apollo program. What they missed was that the technology developed by Apollo not only helped the poor but they hurt all future poor by killing off technological innovation. In this case, denying there is a problem means no money should be spent on researching solutions to the problem.

In the end, it doesn't matter to you or me since we'll be dead. Future Americans? **** them, they're on their own, eh?

 

WTF???

And your source for this is?

 

What are you talking about?

 

More of a gravity bag. Why? It would die. Tell me what would happen if it was over-saturated with CO2? Is there another planet in the Solar System you can use as an example? Do you need a hint?

Spoiler: Hint

https://www.space.com/18527-venus-atmosphere.html
Venus has the distinction of being the hottest planet in the solar system, and the fault lies solely with its atmosphere. What is it about the air on Venus that keeps the planet cooking?

Atmospheric makeup
The atmosphere of Venus is made up almost completely of carbon dioxide. Nitrogen exists in small doses, as do clouds of sulfuric acid. The air of Venus is so dense that the small traces of nitrogen are four times the amount found on Earth, although nitrogen makes up more than three-fourths of the terrestrial atmosphere. This composition causes a runaway greenhouse effect that heats the planet even hotter than the surface of Mercury, although Venus lies farther from the sun. When the rocky core of Venus formed, it captured much of the gas gravitationally.

In addition to warming the planet, the heavy clouds shield it, preventing visible observations of the surface and protecting it from bombardment by all but the largest meteorites.

Although Venus and Earth are similar in size, someone standing on the ground on Venus would experience air about 90 times heavier than Earth's atmosphere; pressures are similar to diving 3,000 feet beneath the ocean. Ironically, the most Earth-like atmosphere in the solar system occurs 30 to 40 miles (50 to 60 kilometers) above the surface of Venus. Both oxygen and hydrogen rise above the heavier gas layer covering the ground, and the pressures are similar to our planet.

Carbon dioxide: 96 percent
Nitrogen: 3.5 percent
Carbon monoxide, argon, sulfur dioxide, and water vapor: less than 1 percent
Climate and weather

Winds of about 224 mph (360 kph) keep the clouds of Venus in constant motion. Though the planet spins slowly, only once every 243 Earth days, the clouds zip around the top of the planet every four days. But wind speeds drop closer to the surface, where they only move a few miles per hour.

On Earth, seasons change based on the planet's tilt; when a hemisphere is closer to the sun, it experiences warmer regions. But on Venus, most of the sun's heat fails to make it through the thick atmosphere. As such, the planet not only doesn't experience significant temperature changes over the course of the year, it also keeps things constant from night to day.

Why worry about it? We'll be dead, right? KOA camps are currently $500/month with water, electric and Wifi. We'll be fine.

 

So your argument is that correlation means causation. The position of the sun is correlated with temperature so the sun is causing the temperature. Does that mean that since the position of the moon is correlated with coldness that the moon is giving off a cooling force to the earth? Correlation doesn't mean causation.

Also the coolest part of the day isn't night, its the morning when the sun is up. In addition the time the sun is highest in the sky is noon which isn't the warmest. In winter there appears to be just as much sun as summer, it is just colder so the correlation between the sun and heat is rocky at best. Admit it, you believe the sun warms the earth because you trust scientists.

Again, you have not given me a straight answer to my question as to what has been causing the 2 F of warming for the last 150 years.

 

Common knowledge to people like me who research it...use Google research it for yourself and come back to me and apologise..please and thank you ..

 

Ah denial, I hear it's nice this time of year.

 

Uhm just look at proxies like you guys so love to do..
Once again in the Jurassic era we had five times the C02 as we do now..


And what happened to plants and animals?


They were huge..

 

And an atmospheric pressure of 90 atmosphere which is about equal to 1 km below the surface of the ocean. Talk about apples to oranges comparisons. An increase of about 100ppm in our atmosphere is actually beneficial. If it got to 600ppm even better. Plants grow better and use less water.

 

No denial give us empirical evidence...

I will wait and wait and wait...

 

You guys? Look, dear, I'm only quoting science. You don't have to care and I don't. I'm still buying my truck. The future can take care of itself. Why you deny this is silly.

 

So am I....


Again was the C02 in the Jurassic era 5 times higher accordintg to scientist?


What I have to prove it ok I will..
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html


Dinosaur Era Had 5 Times Today's CO2

 

Great! Again, why worry about it? I'm buying a truck! The future can take care of itself. I have faith the kids will figure it out.

 

Ok since you didn't want to do it

https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...-will-cost-nz-households-100-a-year--john-key


Paris climate change deal will cost NZ households $100 a year - John Key




Another link...



New Zealand to spend $14 billion to meet Paris Agreement targets





Newshub can reveal the cost to the New Zealand economy to meet Paris Agreement targets will be $1.4 billion every year for a decade.

But that money won't be spent on reducing New Zealand's domestic emissions - it’ll go towards paying other countries to reduce their emissions.

In documents released under the Official Information Act, a briefing to Judith Collins on her first day as Energy Minister says the cost to the economy of buying international carbon units to offset our own emissions will be $14.2 billion over 10 years.

Carbon trading is the process of buying and selling permits and credits to emit carbon dioxide.

In the documents, officials say "this represents a significant transfer of wealth overseas", and also warn "an over reliance on overseas purchasing at the expense of domestic reductions could also leave New Zealand exposed in the face of increasing global carbon prices beyond 2030".

The cost amounts to $1.4 billion annually.

The Green Party says the bill will only get bigger if no action is taken by the Government to reverse climate pollution, and continues to open new coal mines and irrigation schemes.

Co-leader James Shaw argues it’s cheaper for New Zealand to reduce domestic emissions, and it’s risky to take a gamble on an international carbon price which is subject to increase.

"The Government has always said it's too costly for New Zealand to reduce its own greenhouse gas emissions, but what these documents show is they haven't been completely straight with the public because they haven’t been talking about the cost of paying other countries to do it for us."

The Morgan Foundation calculated that in 2014, New Zealand spent about $3.9 million on carbon credits to offset its domestic emissions.

It’s not yet known where the money will come from to foot the $14.2 billion bill

 

Interesting so your attitude went from "save the whales , save the bees save the planet from AGW '


To heck with everyone i am GREEDY going to buy a gas guzzling dually"



Your post don't even make sense now..


How come you just don't by a China made ECC car and a tent if you care so much about man made climate change?


I don't get it?

 

I already did. You dismissed it. I cannot change your mind, you are committed with a semi-religious fervor.

Have a nice day.

 

Wrong. My attitude didn't change. I recognize both the science and the Serenity Prayer. You are free to deny science and fool yourself all you like.

 

So I covered my facts on new Zealand tax carbon scam

Now to back up proof of my claim Germany has three times the electrical rates as the USA...

One link from Exon mobile


http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com



Why are power prices higher in Germany than the U.S.?


A couple of numbers jumped out at me from this recent Reuters report comparing American and European approaches to energy policy.

According to the piece, European Union statistics show that big industrial consumers of energy in German paid 21 cents per kilowatt hour of electricity in 2013.

By contrast, similar industrial consumers in Louisiana paid just five-and-a-half cents per kWh of electricity, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

That would mean German companies can pay almost 4 times as much as American companies. But is the difference really so stark?

Not quite, though there is still a substantial disparity.

According to more in-depth research by my colleagues in Europe whom I asked to look into this, the 21 cents per kWh price the article cited reflects the highest possible price industrial consumers could pay in 2013. The reality is that the average price paid for power by large industrial consumers in Germany in 2013 was 13 cents per kWh.

That’s still more than twice as much as industrial consumers in Louisiana.

What explains the difference? It’s not the stretch of water that separates two continents. It’s the approach that policymakers in European countries take compared to their counterparts at both the federal and state levels in the United States.

The German approach

The EU has a carbon emissions trading scheme that impacts price, for example. Moreover, layers of other policies have further distorted markets.

Since the Fukushima nuclear disaster, German officials have moved to shutter the country’s existing fleet of nuclear reactors, which accounted for roughly 25 percent of the country’s electricity. Nuclear power plants are expensive to build, but once in operation they can generate large amounts of baseload electricity at relatively low cost with no emissions. That existing low-cost generation will be lost.

Moreover, the German government has taken steps to mandate the use of expensive renewable energy in the country’s electricity mix at the expense of relatively inexpensive fossil fuels like coal and natural gas.


Another..

From Reuters

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSL8N1MZ30X


German household power prices at record high -Verivox
Reuters Staff
Oct 24 (Reuters) - German households are paying record high electricity charges, power prices portal Verivox said on Tuesday, urging consumers to compare tariffs and switch away from traditional local suppliers.

"The price of a kilowatt hour (kWh) on average has reached a new all-time high of 28.18 euro cents (33 US cents) ... this means power has become 3 percent more expensive compared with the previous year," Verivox said in a statement.

The price of power in Europe's biggest economy is politically contentious as production is cheap but state taxes and fees amount to 56 percent of the final cost.


Another link


https://www.google.com/amp/amp.dail...europeans-pay-for-electricity-than-americans/

These Maps Show Just How Much More Europeans Pay For Electricity Than Americans
May 1st, 2016

The various nations of the European Union pay a lot more for electricity than American states do, according to an analysis of data by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The DCNF aggregated average annual power prices from the E.U. and U.S. in 2013, the last full year of data. The average European spent 26.9 cents per kilowatt-hour on electricity, while the average American only spent 10.4 cents.


Source: Data from Eurostat 2013

Denmark and Germany were the European nations with the most expensive power, with both countries paying roughly 39 cents per kilowatt-hour due to intense fiscal support for green energy.

Power prices are so absurdly high in both countries that cutbacks have already been made. Denmark’s new government pledged to reduce the amount of money it spends on “green” energy by 67 percent in December and Germany plans to abandon the construction of new wind power plants by 2019.

 

You are posting all over the place now..so you believe in man made climate change yet want to buy a gas guzzling dually?




Say what another person


Says as I do don't do what I do


And you don't see anything wrong with being a hypocrite?


I go for the science you go for junk science with Michael Mann, Cook and Hansen



Once again watch these senate hearing if you want to learn truth ..

 

Disagreed. Yes. Why not? Are you saying I shouldn't?