Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Snowleopard

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 32
16
Environment / Re: Oz PM exposes UN led climate hoax
« on: May 24, 2015, 08:53:43 PM »
  Bingo. Brilliant analysis. Thank you, Snowleopard. You must do this more often and in even greater detail.  Wow.                                                                  Karpatok

Hi K 

Thanks for the applause. 

Yes, it would be good to expand on that little PTB summary.  Perhaps distill the volumes of others into a concise historical essay, while dodging their conflicts.

But what I "must" do (chop wood, carry water, feed animals, milk goats, till gardens etc) often takes up all available time, to the point of not turning on the computer for days at a time.  Then there are last week's little extras:  like an injured dog, marauding bear(s), two frost/freeze warnings and new chicks to care for.  So I won't make any promises.


17
Class II injection wells, are now related to drilling? Or fracking? As opposed to what the article said, which is that this is wastewater injection? is anyone else here aware that wastewater injection ISN'T fracking…but wastewater injection? And has been going on for industrial waste, industrial ag, and produced waters, for more than half a century? I suppose we can't let the facts get in the way, I mean really what fun would THAT be...

The article is saying the wastewater and/or brine being injected is coming from the gas production process.

In order to have a gas production process, you need to drill.

Once you have drilled in this area, in order for the well to be "productive" you then need to frack.

Fracking, by itself, does not cause these earthquakes, but they would not occur if there were no drilling and fracking.

Yes the quakes are primarily caused by injection of brine and wastewater,  and secondarily by the removal of brine from the wells when the gas is produced.  But a layman can be excused of viewing it as one process and calling it fracking.

 In your expert opinion, what are they (as the entire operation) doing wrong.  Bad siting of injection wells or what?


18
Environment / Re: Oz PM exposes UN led climate hoax
« on: May 20, 2015, 11:13:31 AM »
Hi Snowleopard, Just wanted you to know that your efforts in trying to have a friendly logical debate on this topic, and keeping your cool under some virulent attacks is most appreciated.

The points you bring up show a person that has obviously spent a great deal of time studying this situation, and are most interesting observations of much merit in my opinion. It's wonderful to have you back posting again.

Hi Golden Oxen,  Thanks for the kind words.

Insult throwing contests were popular in my grade school, but I like to think I've outgrown them, even if I backslide now and then.  An actual discussion OTOH usually provides opportunities for all to learn something in the exchange.

Yes.  Attempting to understand climate involves a great deal of study.  I've a couple more shelves of books and hundreds of links due to that study.   Interesting as it is though, climate study usually has to take a back seat to the daily realities and more urgent studies.

19
Environment / Re: Oz PM exposes UN led climate hoax
« on: May 20, 2015, 10:30:57 AM »

As i said especially  if u dont believe sources u havent seen go to africa. And see the savannah turning back to forest. Scrawny animals and dead trees all over. 15 yrs ago the trees were alive and the animals sleek. Please tell me with this pause when the 3 hottest years on record since records began in 1880 were? Not the last 3 years by any chance.

Yes, it would be wonderful to have the resources needed hire a caretaker for this place and tour Africa to assess these changes first hand. I'm not in that position.

Since the CO2 "alarmists",  the "deniers", and many with no dog in that fight agree that the savannahs are transitioning into forest, and I've read reports from writers in all three categories, I'm willing to accept this change is happening.    Many think increasing CO2 is the driver here.  Others think changes in wind pattern, temps and moisture are at least as important.  Surely those wishing to promote alarm will select the worst views of these changes to promote their agenda, highlighting local drought conditions.  Did you read my link assessing the changes in the Sahel?  Like I said, it seems more like an overall change of climate zones moving north and reducing desert.

dismissing selectively anything  u dont like as govt propaganda. All supposedly for the sake of taking 30 Years to introduce a new tax they just pretend they do not want All this time because it would cost money to cut pollution. can u tell me why they dont take that long or need such an elaborate ruse to pinch pensions or introduce bailins or rause any other tax to the max?  Why do u consistently ignore the warming in the ocean?


I also routinely run into dismissal of facts I point out as "big oil" propaganda.  I used to accept most government scientific data without question.  I've seen too many "adjustments" (all of which reinforce the warmist case) to that data in the last few years to do that any longer.   Nevertheless I did not just dismiss the NASA chart but provided a link that shows its corruption.

It is obvious that global warming/climate change is a TPTB plan based on its origins, support and funding, the details of which would fill a large book.   Like most schemes of TPTB it is intended to work on many levels at once and is only a piece of a larger plan.  The plans that are successful fund those that need help, with the victims (us) being the ultimate payers. 

They do not think in terms of a human lifetime.  The plan for every nation to be subject to a central bank controlled by them began before Napoleon and continues today.

Very briefly the TPTB used their banks to indebt governments by fomenting wars which increased government debt and enriched their war supply corps.  They could arrange the probable "winner" in these wars by controlling the amount of funds available to the loser. This continued while they moved to control the financial sector by establishing central banks.  If one of the parties to an arranged conflict did not have a central bank, it would be easier to install one after it "lost" and needed funds to rebuild. 

 Once they could "print" unlimited  money through central banks they used this to acquire control of the major corporations with focus on insurance, trading, media, energy and "defense".    In parallel they moved to control education and science, for many reasons, but primarily to control "disruptive" innovations that could threaten their dominance.   This results in a propaganda education where a person is taught what to believe instead of critical thinking skills.  In fields where critical thinking is absolutely necessary, students are taught to confine that activity to their specialty.

The global warming/climate change meme plays into two of their ongoing central plans:   Consolidating control of the worldwide energy sector from production through end use, and consolidating government/NWO.  Carbon tax revenues, carbon trading schemes and increased control of individual choices are (desired) gravy.


20
Environment / Re: Oz PM exposes UN led climate hoax
« on: May 18, 2015, 10:03:51 PM »

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/

Brave Climate Deniers everywhere, please ignore the above silly graph by NASA. 

Within a thousand years or so we are going to get cooler with lots of BRRRR glaciation! Hurry, buy a big oil fired furnace now! Snowleopard, Mking and your great-great-great-great (you get the idea  ;)) grandchildren will thank you. :evil4:


First off that graph is just government propaganda.

If you can stand to look at a denier website there is a view at where the same graph was in 2002.  Nice  "adjustments"!

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/05/16/the-nasa-temperature-record-is-a-farce/

NO.  For most people it's probably not a good idea to buy a large oil furnace. 

If/when you need/want to add heating capacity, I'd not suggest oil unless you live near the oil patches.  Even then keeping what you have and adding a backup system that can run with your primary if necessary.  It might be more expensive but gives resilience.   Even better if the fuel for that backup system doesn't have a distant origin.

Full disclosure: I use wood cut on my property as primary and propane for backup. (Propane does not decay, so if I don't use it this year it will be good next year etc.)

Yes AG it will probably take 1000 years or a bit longer for significant glaciation to develop.  But the grain belts will move south, shrink and could be out of production due to cold within three decades.  People will be fighting for food (and to stay warm) long before they see new  glaciers.

21
Environment / Re: Oz PM exposes UN led climate hoax
« on: May 18, 2015, 08:04:30 PM »
UB debunks Snowleopard (sl)!

What a joke to present a graph of the last 18 years to say no warming in that period debunks global warming when those same years contai n all the hottest in history. Since 96. Now go ahead and expand those last 18 years back  the 50 million u say are relevant to show the real picture. And while u r at it lets see the ocean temps in the same period since 96 . Then tell the truth about who has conceded anything.
:emthup:  :icon_mrgreen:


No. Obviously it has warmed since the Little Ice Age.  As I've said before that warming is "undeniable". 

The 18 year graph was in response to those who DENY "The Pause" or "Hiatus" depending what "side" they might be on.  The 18 years without warming does not say it didn't warm to that point, but obviously shows that warming has stopped.  Since CO2 is still increasing at about the rate it was increasing before the warming stopped, this further suggests CO2 did not cause that warming.

The african savannahs flora and fauna are in very poor shape now compared to 18 years ago. 18 years ago we did not have 45c heatwaves we break records on this every summer. The graph was not in response to anyone it was a standalone statement and purported to speaj for others while leaving out the consensus response of explanation which you still also fail to adress. Ocean heatsink and rising temp Therein.

I'm thinking this horse is about beaten to death, but I'll give it one more shot of adrenaline.

I am interested in the truth, not in what a bunch of government paid  liars want me to believe. 

These government lies, at the behest of the international bankers, as an excuse to implement their global governance schemes, by pretending CO2 (a trace gas essential to all life on Earth) is a dangerous pollutant.  We are in fact carbon based life forms and both our blood and breath would be dangerous pollutants if you believe the so called government consensus bull.

Quote
The graph was not in response to anyone it was a standalone statement

See Reply #3 by AG:

Quote
For the last three years or so you have been pushing unscientific, pro-fossil fuel propaganda like "sunspots, not fossil fuel burning, causes global warming", "the alleged "pause" in global warming (That HAS been proven a hoax generated by pro-fossil fuel propaganda), the "new ice age" (see Snowleopard wanting to move "south" and making plans to "ice skate on the Potomac" LOL!), ETC. 

BTW The IPCC, NASA, NOAA, UK MET Office, Jim Hansen and many other prominent warmists have all conceded "The Pause" is real.  Those avoiding this reality are either in denial or it interferes with their agenda (like O'Bomber)


Quote
The african savannahs flora and fauna are in very poor shape now compared to 18 years ago

Probably true.    Savannahs are a balancing act between grassland and forest, when that balance tips one way or another those fauna and flora specifically adapted to the savannah will suffer.

The real questions are which way and why?

Which way is not in much doubt:

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_surprising_role_of_co2_in_changes_on_the_african_savanna/2663/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/02/co2-is-greening-the-planet-african-savannahs-getting-a-makeover-to-forests/

If one looks at the Sahel:

http://thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/mueller-sahel.pdf

A bigger picture (the why) emerges of CO2 as plant food.

Desert is turning into grassland.  Grassland is turning into savannah, and savannah is transitioning to forest.

There are ways these changes are bad, and there are ways these changes are good, some will suffer in all change;  but overall less desert means more living area.

22
its a huge speculation and ridiculous. How do they figure?  What skinny people consume less air than fat?  Aircraft doing food drops from international aid efforts in famines pollute less than the people would if they were well fed?  Wheres the math on this?

I've often wondered how US Govt rationalized the corn to ethanol thing.

This study purports to explore that.

Yes it is ridiculous, that was the point;   but that doesn't mean it's not true.

It's pretty obvious that a body that metabolizes less carbs will emit less CO2, and even more obvious that starving people have less offspring and die sooner.

The study is not available to me from here, but since it's Princeton, it is likely to be credible.

Here is the link, if you have access:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6229/1420.short

U dont need to read the whole study. The abstract says it all  . 1 The effects and relationships are unknown 2.  "In effect" eating less pollutes less. First lets look at what u say is obvious. Starving people breed less and die sooner. have u been to places like phillpines or india or africa? you will see them all with 5 to 10 children They breed just fine With calorie deficit.
And they walk or bicycle burning a lot of calories. THey do a lot of work by hand like washing clothes. So they burn plenty and respirate plenty with blittle food. How does this compare with using a car orcwashing machine for pollution?  a car will burn more oxygen in a day and possibly even an hour than a person in a lifetime. And if they really start starving that is a humanitarian crisis and the un wfp gets involved. Foreign nationals fly there and set up hq and many vehicles including 4wd and trucks and helicopters and transport planes are used. The pollution from these  far exceeds the saving in breathing  from the few who drop dead before they get there.

it is eating too much that causes inactivity reducing breathing and infertility Reducing population. If u watch the biggest loser there are always women saying they need to lose the weight to get pregnant. being too overweight will prevent anyone wanting to have sex with them in the first place. And as for dying sooner eating too much will increase your risks a lot more than eating too little.

From the abstract:

Quote
Our analysis of the three major models used to set government policies in the United States and Europe suggests that ethanol policies in effect are relying on decreases in food consumption to generate GHG savings

OK   If you wish to proclaim that the study (or the policies) are invalid without reading the study, go ahead.   You could even be correct!

I think the policies are wrong if they are as alleged, whether technically valid or not, and that is my intended emphasis.


23
Environment / Re: Oz PM exposes UN led climate hoax
« on: May 13, 2015, 12:11:48 PM »
UB debunks Snowleopard (sl)!

What a joke to present a graph of the last 18 years to say no warming in that period debunks global warming when those same years contai n all the hottest in history. Since 96. Now go ahead and expand those last 18 years back  the 50 million u say are relevant to show the real picture. And while u r at it lets see the ocean temps in the same period since 96 . Then tell the truth about who has conceded anything.
:emthup:  :icon_mrgreen:


No. Obviously it has warmed since the Little Ice Age.  As I've said before that warming is "undeniable". 

The 18 year graph was in response to those who DENY "The Pause" or "Hiatus" depending what "side" they might be on.  The 18 years without warming does not say it didn't warm to that point, but obviously shows that warming has stopped.  Since CO2 is still increasing at about the rate it was increasing before the warming stopped, this further suggests CO2 did not cause that warming.

24
Environment / Re: Oz PM exposes UN led climate hoax
« on: May 13, 2015, 11:53:15 AM »
So again u ignore ocean temp talk about temp instead of climate. And tell us that the 50 million year trend is dOwn. But u got to leave out that 50 million d ownward turning sharply up since we started burning fossil fuels. So sl wtf is the skijump shape of the trend?  Why in the last 1oo yrs the trend ends. Why do u  have to present false graph claiming it goes to yr 2ooo when its only to 1950. Because  the steep climb upwards in the last 65 yrs would put the lie to it. As for your alternative explanation for wandering jetstream it ignores alaska and siberia shorts and t shirt winter weather.

If you look at the periodicy it is obvious we were due for a temp uptick with or without fossil fuels.  We have still not exceeded the natural variability shown in the long term charts.

When I find a better graph I'll start using it. 

Obviously if deception was my intent, I could have neglected to disclose I was aware of the problem and pleaded ignorance if caught. That's not my style. 

The purpose of the chart is to show the millennial trend of decreasing peaks in warm periods and increasing lengths in cold periods.  Yes, if that graph is extended to present time it will show current warming (at Greenland) which will still be well short of the Medieval Warm Period's temps, and much less than earlier warm periods.

For some reason,  scientific dating convention YBP (Years Before Present) defines present currently at 2000, and formerly it was 1950.  Many older scientists did not change and are still using 1950.  This has caused many scientific documents to be published with those dates swapped due to editorial confusion (the editors being younger).  The error in the chart is of that character.  There is no attempt to deceive by me or the scientist.


Meridional winds obviously go both ways, and in the NH at the North end of a wind blowing from the South it will be warmer.  This will tend to heat the Arctic and taiga in spots, but overall the NH cools.  If my prognosis is correct, this process will accelerate over the next quarter century and NH temps two decades from now will approach 19th century values. (or colder if major volcanic eruptions occur.

25
I've often wondered how US Govt rationalized the corn to ethanol thing.

That's explainable under the subject of "conduit scheme", well defined by Steve from Virginia.

Yes, I'm sure "corn to ethanol"  qualifies as a conduit scheme.  No question that such a scheme (or something quite similar) is actually the prime motivation, rather than any concern for the environment.

Nonetheless it would be interesting to find a justification along the lines alleged by this study.

26
Off the rails: US railway crisis blamed on lack of funding, crumbling infrastructure



http://rt.com/usa/258109-us-railway-crash-history/

RT can be accused of having an anti-US agenda, but this is spot on. 

In my area, almost all rail infrastructure is being allowed to deteriorate.  Most of what little is done to maintain rail, grade and gauge happens where rail lines are visible to the public.   It's much worse a hundred yards from the nearest road.

27
its a huge speculation and ridiculous. How do they figure?  What skinny people consume less air than fat?  Aircraft doing food drops from international aid efforts in famines pollute less than the people would if they were well fed?  Wheres the math on this?

I've often wondered how US Govt rationalized the corn to ethanol thing.

This study purports to explore that.

Yes it is ridiculous, that was the point;   but that doesn't mean it's not true.

It's pretty obvious that a body that metabolizes less carbs will emit less CO2, and even more obvious that starving people have less offspring and die sooner.

The study is not available to me from here, but since it's Princeton, it is likely to be credible.

Here is the link, if you have access:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6229/1420.short

28
The new human that is coming won't "vibrate"
or as the native americans say "your spirit"
will resonate to a higher frequency. P.A.G.G.L.E.S.
Pride Anger Greed Gluttony Lust Envy Sloth will be
such a painful experience on an individual basis
(the collective / us, already sees this} that death
will be on much more swifter level. We are already
seeing this.
example would be bankster suicides.

I suspect you may be generally correct,  but don't see it moving there very fast.

Perhaps those few banksters who retain sensitivity may indeed reform or suicide.

Aren't true psychopaths more or less immune to "vibrations"?

As long as there is war, rape and child abuse won't there be more "made" psychopaths?

Do you envision mass refusal to join armies even when threatened with execution?

Do you think eventually the greedsters may not be able to reincarnate? ???

If so, the smarter members of their team are probably aware of this. and....

If/when they, as a group, decide they have nothing to lose,  that could be peak danger time.

Nonetheless, I'm not convinced we are there yet, or that the majority of those bankster "suicides" aren't some type of infighting or discipline.

Thoughts??

29
Agelbert Newz / Re: Agelbert's Newz Channel
« on: May 12, 2015, 08:46:09 PM »
Quote
You will have to stand in line behind Golden Oxen, MKing, Snowleopard and a few others who would love to see one more salt water nigger silenced.

Naah....No fun in that.   Against my rules too. 

Those who wish to silence (or denigrate, ostracize, smear etc) their opposition, rather than help them see the light are usually my opponents. 

Since the basic battle IS spiritual, adopting the tactics of the enemy is tantamount to joining his side in fact, if not in name.

THE END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS.


30

Quote
Shrinking the amount of food that people and livestock eat decreases the amount of carbon dioxide that they breathe out or excrete as waste. The reduction in food available for consumption, rather than any inherent fuel efficiency, drives the decline in carbon dioxide emissions in government models, the researchers found.


http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-03/pu-dbp032715.php

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 32