12-4-2015; HUGE Storm moving toward California

On July 23, 2016, we discontinued our forums. We ask our members to please join us in our new community site, The Hartmann Report. Please note that you will have to register a new account on The Hartmann Report.

39 posts / 0 new

Published on Dec 4, 2015

Friday, 12-5-2015; "An enormous North Pacific low pressure storm system is attempting to deliver rain to the West coast and California. Local TV weather reports (KCAL-9 TV) did NOT show us the storm system located just offshore of California on their cartoon weather report"

YouTube Video

ABCee's picture
ABCee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Comments

When Mother Nature seeks balance, the overcompensation can be catastrophic.

mlk.silenceisnotanoption

VIOLENCE IS NOT AN OPTION

mlk.silenceisnotanoption (not verified)
Quote ABCee:

Published on Dec 4, 2015

Friday, 12-5-2015; "An enormous North Pacific low pressure storm system is attempting to deliver rain to the West coast and California. Local TV weather reports (KCAL-9 TV) did NOT show us the storm system located just offshore of California on their cartoon weather report"

Another video by that moron? Gee... if you claim... the weather system WANTS to bring rain into Cal... and it doesn't get there... then you've created your own bogyman.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

OK, getting caught up, I've been ignoreing all the chemtrail posts, didn't know ABC was the guy.

Not a believer in the chem trail stuff, however,

the Weather Channel HAS been predicting a "huge" storm approaching the west coast (I'm in the east, so I pay marginal attention depending on the jet stream- though I admit being an amature meteorologist in my own mind- just normal geekishness)

nonetheless, I cannot retract my statement that

when Mother Nature seeks balance, the overcompensation can be catastroshic.

of course, that's all about US- humans and OUR stuff, when weather becomes "catastrophic"

peace all------and btw, my town got "crop dusted" against some "bug" w/o warning 2 summers ago. The local media got FLOODED w/calls about the low-flying plane flying a repetitive pattern...........still not sure what THAT poison was............

so...................

ok, still not buying the chem trails, but WE got "dusted" w/o warning and was followed up in the local media after the event............

eeeeek

GL to the Cali Ski resorts and mountains, the moisture is needed

mlk.silenceisnotanoption

VIOLENCE IS NOT AN OPTION

mlk.silenceisnotanoption (not verified)
Quote mlk.silenceisnotanoption:

the Weather Channel HAS been predicting a "huge" storm approaching the west coast (I'm in the east, so I pay marginal attention depending on the jet stream- though I admit being an amature meteorologist in my own mind- just normal geekishness)

The "west coast" is pretty large... and just like all those hurricanes ABC claims are going to hit Cal and don't, it's the false claim that's the problem... not mysterious forces keeping the storms away. That was quite evident by a map of the tracks of all these southern hurricanes going back to 1985 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Global_tropical_cycl... and virtually NONE make it up towards southern Cal... ABC's insidious HAARP wasn't in operation in the 80's. And if one wants to go back further there's the NOAA archive of hurricane maps such as http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tracks/tracks-ep-1984.png  Just keep changing the year and these maps go back to http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tracks/tracks-ep-1949.png

So what's ABC's theory going to be? That as part of the conspiracy NOAA is going back to fake their archives?

The bigger question is WHY is southern Cal an arid zone to begin with. But for ABC and his YouTube alter ego to explore that is to undermine his blind belief there's a conspiracy.

This site is fascinating... a computer simulation based on real world data.

http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=mean_sea...

Leaving aside that ABC has NEVER been able to explain why his mysterious evil conspiracy wants to punish southern Cal with a drought... what ABC is claiming is the evil conspiracy has the power to direct that low pressure area that's about 3000 MILES wide. Conversely, if it's a high pressure zone keeping these storms at bay... it's 2000 MILES WIDE http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_24904396/california-drought-whats-...

Leaving aside that it's only the Chemtrail Kooks that seem to believe in a conspiracy of such magnitude... if they have that power... why not create perfect weather over the entire US?

At times like this the best explanation is the simplest one. Southern Cal has always been arid. It didn't just get that way when HAARP went to operations in the 90s... that and droughts happen.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

true Ul, SoCal has always been arid- desert. Makes me wanna go re-watch Jack Nicholson almost get his nose chopped off while trying to rescue Faye Dunnaway from incest while foiling a water-diversion-keep LA green-$$$$-conspiracy:

China Town.

nothing new, eh?

mlk.silenceisnotanoption

VIOLENCE IS NOIT AN OPTION

mlk.silenceisnotanoption (not verified)
Quote ulTRAX:Leaving aside that ABC has NEVER been able to explain why his mysterious evil conspiracy wants to punish southern Cal with a drought... what ABC is claiming is the evil conspiracy has the power to direct that low pressure area that's about 3000 MILES wide. Conversely, if it's a high pressure zone keeping these storms at bay... it's 2000 MILES WIDE http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_24904396/california-drought-whats-...

Leaving aside that it's only the Chemtrail Kooks that seem to believe in a conspiracy of such magnitude... if they have that power... why not create perfect weather over the entire US?

At times like this the best explanation is the simplest one. Southern Cal has always been arid. It didn't just get that way when HAARP went to operations in the 90s... that and droughts happen.

>>>Still waiting for what might now be months for ABC to explain why ABC thinks the US government wants to deprive southern Cal of water.<<<

In some old post I once said that an 8.0 earthquake in San Francisco would NOT be a "disaster" if no one lived there. The problem with southern Cal is the same. When people overpopulate and over-farm an arid region... then it's not the periodic droughts that are the problem.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote ulTRAX, the hypocrite, wrote:
Quote ulTRAX:Leaving aside that ABC has NEVER been able to explain why his mysterious evil conspiracy wants to punish southern Cal with a drought... what ABC is claiming is the evil conspiracy has the power to direct that low pressure area that's about 3000 MILES wide. Conversely, if it's a high pressure zone keeping these storms at bay... it's 2000 MILES WIDE http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_24904396/california-drought-whats-causing-it

Leaving aside that it's only the Chemtrail Kooks that seem to believe in a conspiracy of such magnitude... if they have that power... why not create perfect weather over the entire US?

At times like this the best explanation is the simplest one. Southern Cal has always been arid. It didn't just get that way when HAARP went to operations in the 90s... that and droughts happen.

>>>Still waiting for what might now be months for ABC to explain why ABC thinks the US government wants to deprive southern Cal of water.<<<

...and I'm still waiting for you to tell us what you're going to use to "seed the atmosphere" instead of "spamming" the other thread!

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote carrying on his infantile pissing contest from another thread mjolnir wrote:...and I'm still waiting for you to tell us what you're going to use to "seed the atmosphere" instead of "spamming" the other thread!

Gee, since I never proposed such measures... only provided what others like Edward Teller have as an EXAMPLE of climate control, as oppose to weather control... I can only say again...

If you can't make a point without gross distortions... or in this case lying through your teeth hoping to score some cheap points, you really havn't made a point... have you Spanky?

I can only assume that you've given up on any substantive arguments in ANY thread... and you hope this transparent diversion will divert from that failure.

Poor baby. You have a choice to grow up... or continue with this infantile charade. So far you've doubled down on the later.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2015/11/nasa-study-mass-gains-antarcti...

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

You said it. You admitted you said it - you lie about it. Then you have the gall to criticize others for not answering questions. How many times are you going to "spam" this thread hypocrite?

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mjolnir:

You said it. You admitted you said it - you lie about it. Then you have the gall to criticize others for not answering questions. How many times are you going to "spam" this thread hypocrite?

Gee, so if I write something as an EXAMPLE to illustrate the difference between Kilo's ignorant claim of using WEATHER control do deal with climate change... something you STILL refuse to call him out on... and CLIMATE control... and you then deliberately misrepresent my post and say was endorsing, therefore must explain those ideas... then in your mind I'm lying?

The only one reduced to obvious dishonesty is you. Since you seem to believe you have moral superiority because of your Biblical views I can only assume that some bizarre Christian paradox is at work that a morally degenerate leftist such as myself can't fathom.

You're leaving us all with no other explanations for your behavior except that you've given up trying to win debates with substantive arguments and think resorting to such infantile tactics can divert attention from that. Or you're still pissed from 3 years back that you accused me of not being a gun owner and got shot down when I proved I was.

Either way... please grow up.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote ulTRAX:
Quote mjolnir:

You said it. You admitted you said it - you lie about it. Then you have the gall to criticize others for not answering questions. How many times are you going to "spam" this thread hypocrite?

Gee, so if I write something as an EXAMPLE to illustrate the difference between Kilo's ignorant claim of using WEATHER control do deal with climate change... something you STILL refuse to call him out on... and CLIMATE control... and you then deliberately misrepresent my post and say was endorsing, therefore must explain those ideas... then in your mind I'm lying?

The only one reduced to obvious dishonesty is you. Since you seem to believe you have moral superiority because of your Biblical views I can only assume that some bizarre Christian paradox is at work that a morally degenerate leftist such as myself can't fathom.

You're leaving us all with no other explanations for your behavior except that you've given up trying to win debates with substantive arguments and think resorting to such infantile tactics can divert attention from that. Or you're still pissed from 3 years back that you accused me of not being a gun owner and got shot down when I proved I was.

Either way... please grow up.

This is the entire paragragh. NOTHING about it suggests that I took you out of context.
Quote ultrax, the hypocrite, wrote:Feasibility for the Space Blind is based completely on whether there's a commitment or not. By your standards the US could never have built up a war machine that could transport and supply millions of US forces to Europe or across the Pacific to fight WWII. If the estimated cost is 5 trillion... say even 10 trillion over 10 years. How can the planet NOT afford that given the costs of doing nothing? Either way we have to pay the piper. And solar radiation control could also be done by seeding the atmosphere, a Space Blind... AND reducing CO2. ...

You like to castigate others for not answering questions yet you refuse to do so yourself.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

Poor M, still determined to misrepresent what I said... then demanding I answer a question about what was merely an EXAMPLE to Kilo

Quote mjolnir:

This is the entire paragragh. NOTHING about it suggests that I took you out of context.

Quote ultrax, the hypocrite, wrote:Feasibility for the Space Blind is based completely on whether there's a commitment or not. By your standards the US could never have built up a war machine that could transport and supply millions of US forces to Europe or across the Pacific to fight WWII. If the estimated cost is 5 trillion... say even 10 trillion over 10 years. How can the planet NOT afford that given the costs of doing nothing? Either way we have to pay the piper. And solar radiation control could also be done by seeding the atmosphere, a Space Blind... AND reducing CO2. ...
More of your typical sleaze? So you think if you say "This is the entire paragraph. NOTHING about it suggests that I took you out of context." that somehow will shield you from the fact that it DOES take me out of context from the discussion with K? And let's not forget that you STILL refuse to correct him for his claim that we needed to control "weather" and not climate.

It was in that context where Kilo was refusing to deal with his own stupid claim that I wrote

Quote Kilosqrd: And you believe this is feasable. I'm still laughing.

ulTRAX: Moving the goal post? Your original argument was we had to control "weather" which by definition is LOCAL. How's that argument going, aye Einstein? Oh, that's right... you swept it under the rug. I only raised the issue of solar radiation control since it's aimed at CLIMATE control. Despite your original ignorant claim "Can't control the climate without controlling the weather." Weather depends on climate... not the other way around.

Please keep up your infantile games M. If I said anything stupid I'd just admit it as I've done before. That you're determined to play this game only highlights the fact that you've given up any substantive discussion for laughable diversions that fall apart under the most cursory examination.

Since you're suddenly into questions... here's one. Since you like to present yourself as morally superior because of your religious views, isn't there something in your book of bronze age fairy tales about bearing false witness? Yes or No? If yes, what it is it?

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

You can squirm around all you want, the facts are obvious. You advanced the supposition that "seeding the atmosphere" along with a "space blind" and reducing/sequestration of CO2 were viable options. You refuse to flesh out the idea of atmospheric "seeding" because that puts you uncomfortably close to the "contrails" camp, members of which you've been mercilessly derogatory.

Bearing false witness is indeed a 'sin', putting the forum's leading purveyor of "ad hominem" attacks (you) in his place is emminently satisfying. I may have to skip lunch, Lol.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mjolnir:

You can squirm around all you want, the facts are obvious.

Yup, the facts are you've given up all substantive debate hoping to score some points with cheap personal shots.

How's that been working for ya... aye Spanky?

If YOU are so interested in people backing up what they say... we're STILL waiting for you to ask Kilo how global warming can be dealt with using WEATHER control. He never explained how it would be done or how controlling weather could affect climate. But we know you'll never confront him.

In the infantile world you've chosen to live in, fellow braindead right wingers always get a free pass regardless of the stupid things they say... but just for spite you'll gladly hope to score cheap points by misrepresenting what someone said... especially if they proved you've made a fool of yourself in the past. That you're AGAIN making a fool of yourself matters not. neither does being a hypocrite by your own moral code.

Wow! Care to go for a third personal failing? Maybe that's harassing this thread with your off topic personal attacks.

As Spock would say... "fascinating". Don't stop now. You're giving us all plenty of material to ponder as we explore the infantile side of the adult, right wing mind.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

It is raining in Northern California. We need the rain here to lessen our drought. The weather is O.K. as long as you stay inside and have a home and are not homeless.

Mark the Shark's picture
Mark the Shark
Joined:
Nov. 18, 2011 3:02 pm

YOU may thank the HAARP masters for the pittance of moisture they deemed upon you-

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

So you can demand answers of others but don't feel the need to respond in kind? Sorry buddyboy it doesn't work that way. In reference to other threads - all anyone has to do is read them to see the frequency with which Cap, Redwing, myself and others have made you out for the bombastic fool you are, Lol.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mjolnir:

... all anyone has to do is read them to see the frequency with which Cap, Redwing, myself and others have made you out for the bombastic fool you are, Lol.

copy that!

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote stwo:
Quote mjolnir:

... all anyone has to do is read them to see the frequency with which Cap, Redwing, myself and others have made you out for the bombastic fool you are, Lol.

copy that!

TRANSLATION: You, Mjolnir, (and the long-banned Cap) are tired of losing arguments and prefer personal attacks to divert from that fact.

Why didn't you just say so?

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote mjolnir:

So you can demand answers of others but don't feel the need to respond in kind? Sorry buddyboy it doesn't work that way.

Gee Einstein.. back to your sinful bearing false witness? I ALREADY DID address your invalid questions. I have no responsibility to explain what I never endorsed. I only raised some examples to differentiate Kilo's WEATHER control from CLIMATE control.

But if you're so determined to play your childish game that you feel the need to abandon any substantive discussion, disrupt threads, all to make personal attacks... I DEMAND ANSWERS TO THE FOLLOWING: When was the last time you beat your wife?

Why does the sun rise in the west?

Why is the world flat?

Will you ever grow up and stop being an infantile arse?

As I said, thank M... you're giving us all plenty of material to ponder as we explore the infantile side of the adult, right wing mind.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote ulTRAX:
Quote stwo:
Quote mjolnir:

... all anyone has to do is read them to see the frequency with which Cap, Redwing, myself and others have made you out for the bombastic fool you are, Lol.

copy that!

TRANSLATION: You, Mjolnir, (and the long-banned Cap) are tired of losing arguments and prefer personal attacks to divert from that fact.

Why didn't you just say so?

Lol, there is nothing in the full paragraph I posted above that indicates that you do anything other than espouse "seeding the atmosphere." You're just too hypocritical to answer because that puts you in the "contrails" crowd.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote ulTRAX:

Poor M, still determined to misrepresent what I said... then demanding I answer a question about what was merely an EXAMPLE to Kilo

Quote mjolnir:

This is the entire paragragh. NOTHING about it suggests that I took you out of context.

Quote ultrax, the hypocrite, wrote:Feasibility for the Space Blind is based completely on whether there's a commitment or not. By your standards the US could never have built up a war machine that could transport and supply millions of US forces to Europe or across the Pacific to fight WWII. If the estimated cost is 5 trillion... say even 10 trillion over 10 years. How can the planet NOT afford that given the costs of doing nothing? Either way we have to pay the piper. And solar radiation control could also be done by seeding the atmosphere, a Space Blind... AND reducing CO2. ...
More of your typical sleaze? So you think if you say "This is the entire paragraph. NOTHING about it suggests that I took you out of context." that somehow will shield you from the fact that it DOES take me out of context from the discussion with K? And let's not forget that you STILL refuse to correct him for his claim that we needed to control "weather" and not climate.

It was in that context where Kilo was refusing to deal with his own stupid claim that I wrote

Quote Kilosqrd: And you believe this is feasable. I'm still laughing.

ulTRAX: Moving the goal post? Your original argument was we had to control "weather" which by definition is LOCAL. How's that argument going, aye Einstein? Oh, that's right... you swept it under the rug. I only raised the issue of solar radiation control since it's aimed at CLIMATE control. Despite your original ignorant claim "Can't control the climate without controlling the weather." Weather depends on climate... not the other way around.

Please keep up your infantile games M. If I said anything stupid I'd just admit it as I've done before. That you're determined to play this game only highlights the fact that you've given up any substantive discussion for laughable diversions that fall apart under the most cursory examination.

Since you're suddenly into questions... here's one. Since you like to present yourself as morally superior because of your religious views, isn't there something in your book of bronze age fairy tales about bearing false witness? Yes or No? If yes, what it is it?

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

You not reading posts again - I answered that here:

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2015/12/12-4-2015-huge-storm-moving-to...

Maybe you're just in too big a hurry to spam this thread the way you've done the other one.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mjolnir:

Maybe you're just in too big a hurry to spam this thread the way you've done the other one.

Boy, you nailed that. This little weasel has been trying to stifle all those that confront his BS.

Moderator, moderator.......

Dexterous's picture
Dexterous
Joined:
Apr. 9, 2013 8:35 am
Quote ulTRAX:
Quote stwo:
Quote mjolnir:

... all anyone has to do is read them to see the frequency with which Cap, Redwing, myself and others have made you out for the bombastic fool you are, Lol.

copy that!

TRANSLATION: You, Mjolnir, (and the long-banned Cap) are tired of losing arguments and prefer personal attacks to divert from that fact.

Why didn't you just say so?

LOL Losing an argument?? Never tried to win one. Being "right" not important to me- being a pest is enough.

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote stwo:LOL Losing an argument?? Never tried to win one. Being "right" not important to me- being a pest is enough.

Ya, I think your self assessment is pretty spot on. Thanks for your honesty.

For the life of me I can't really recall any intelligent or devastating argument you've EVER made.

Now I know why!

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote oblivious to his off-topic spamming mjolnir wrote:Maybe you're just in too big a hurry to spam this thread the way you've done the other one.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Moaning: "Forums are my "high" and its destructive to the rest of my life.", ulTRAX aka Pierpont wrote:blah blah blah off topic blah blah blah
Preventing 'wandering' threads is easier if people like you refrained from obfuscation and deceit.

You espoused "seeding the atmosphere" and "space blinds" then refuse to explain when caught in your own 'web'.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote ulTRAX:
Quote stwo:LOL Losing an argument?? Never tried to win one. Being "right" not important to me- being a pest is enough.

Ya, I think your self assessment is pretty spot on. Thanks for your honesty.

For the life of me I can't really recall any intelligent or devastating argument you've EVER made.

Now I know why!

Pearls before swine and all.

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote mjolnir:
Quote Moaning: "Forums are my "high" and its destructive to the rest of my life.", ulTRAX aka Pierpont wrote:blah blah blah off topic blah blah blah
Preventing 'wandering' threads is easier if people like you refrained from obfuscation and deceit.

You espoused "seeding the atmosphere" and "space blinds" then refuse to explain when caught in your own 'web'.

Still feel some pathological need to lie about what I wrote? Wow, you must REALLY be desperate to revenge my making a fool of you back in that gun thread. Actually I just exposed your when you made a fool of yourself.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote mjolnir:
Quote ulTRAX:
Quote mjolnir:

You said it. You admitted you said it - you lie about it. Then you have the gall to criticize others for not answering questions. How many times are you going to "spam" this thread hypocrite?

Gee, so if I write something as an EXAMPLE to illustrate the difference between Kilo's ignorant claim of using WEATHER control do deal with climate change... something you STILL refuse to call him out on... and CLIMATE control... and you then deliberately misrepresent my post and say was endorsing, therefore must explain those ideas... then in your mind I'm lying?

The only one reduced to obvious dishonesty is you. Since you seem to believe you have moral superiority because of your Biblical views I can only assume that some bizarre Christian paradox is at work that a morally degenerate leftist such as myself can't fathom.

You're leaving us all with no other explanations for your behavior except that you've given up trying to win debates with substantive arguments and think resorting to such infantile tactics can divert attention from that. Or you're still pissed from 3 years back that you accused me of not being a gun owner and got shot down when I proved I was.

Either way... please grow up.

This is the entire paragragh. NOTHING about it suggests that I took you out of context.
Quote ultrax, the hypocrite, wrote:Feasibility for the Space Blind is based completely on whether there's a commitment or not. By your standards the US could never have built up a war machine that could transport and supply millions of US forces to Europe or across the Pacific to fight WWII. If the estimated cost is 5 trillion... say even 10 trillion over 10 years. How can the planet NOT afford that given the costs of doing nothing? Either way we have to pay the piper. And solar radiation control could also be done by seeding the atmosphere, a Space Blind... AND reducing CO2. ...

You like to castigate others for not answering questions yet you refuse to do so yourself.

It's evident to anyone who can read that you (ultrax) are the liar here. You quit the gun thread because you couldn't back up your baseless ass-ertions.

Reply to #31

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mjolnir:You quit the gun thread because you couldn't back up your baseless ass-ertions.

Gee, I quit the gun thread because you were being as infantile and obsessed then as you are now. You made a fool of yourself by saying I wasn't a gun owner... and I proved I was with an image of my old gun permit and instruction manual. You then lied and pretended you never made that accusation and looked for any infantile diversion you could. Since it was clear you were just desperate for revenge I gave up. Poor M... I'm sorry I hurt your pride. But the way to deal with it is to grow up... not remain a petty little brat.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote mjolnir:This is the entire paragragh. NOTHING about it suggests that I took you out of context.
Quote ultrax, the hypocrite, wrote:Feasibility for the Space Blind is based completely on whether there's a commitment or not. By your standards the US could never have built up a war machine that could transport and supply millions of US forces to Europe or across the Pacific to fight WWII. If the estimated cost is 5 trillion... say even 10 trillion over 10 years. How can the planet NOT afford that given the costs of doing nothing? Either way we have to pay the piper. And solar radiation control could also be done by seeding the atmosphere, a Space Blind... AND reducing CO2. ...
Leaving aside that I ALREADY proved you lied by pretending you took nothing out of context by removing the paragraph before...

YOU started by claiming at one point I did NOT endorse some ideas then claimed I DID. This will be my last post to this thread on this topic.

My point was AND IT'S RIGHT THERE... "How can the planet NOT afford that given the costs of doing nothing? Either way we have to pay the piper."

Kilo was claiming ideas I mentioned were impractical to which I responded, as I always have that we may have to do whatever it takes since the costs of doing nothing are going to be higher. This has ALWAYS been my argument...

To NOT believe greenhouse gases play a role in capturing heat is to not believe in physics. And pray tell Einstein... how can you detect signal to noise if there are more than one variable at work? What if there is solar variation atop orbital gyrations atop greenhouse gases? Say it's ONLY solar variation. Does that mean we're magically out of the woods? Humans have spent untold trillions building seaside cities, and developing agriculture zones based on the climate of the past few millennium. We just can't pick up and leave as we did 2-3-5000 years ago. It may be cheaper to drastically REDUCE greenhouse gasses as the only way to prevent the destruction of these cities or those agricultural zones.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2013/09/why-does-right-dismiss-climate...

Humans have invested untold trillions in seaside cities based on the sea level of the past 3000 years or so. It may be less expensive to try and modify the climate than to protect and/or abandon these cities... or face disruptions to global agriculture

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2015/06/florida-deserves-be-underwater...

I've always found it amusing that so many right wing climate deniers want it both ways... to admit earth's climate is warming yet we dare not blame human activity. Implicit in the argument is that if it's all natural climate variability we're all somehow out of the woods. And yet humanity has these last 1-2000 years invested hundreds of trillions based the today's climate norm... by that I mean our seaside cities and agricultural zones. Even if climate change is 100% natural... we'd still to have to invest trillions to slow or reverse it simple to protect those cities and other historical investments... and prevent mass migrations of people.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2015/09/thom-ignored-salinity-driving-...

There are not many options given the problem. Either we block solar radiation, reduce/sequester CO2, or some combination. So, IF those ideas such as a space blind, or seeding the atmosphere, or sequestering CO2 are feasible AND ARE CHEAPER than the cost of the disruptions mentioned above... then we may have to investigate them further as well as any other ideas. That's not an endorsement of specific proposals. They were examples to Kilo of what CLIMATE control might look like as opposed to his WEATHER control... which he never fleshed out... and you seem determined to give him a free pass for.

So Einstein, what are YOUR ideas? Let me guess... to wait for Jesus to come down and magically save us all.

Feel free to keep your infantile pissing contest going. I'm through with this topic.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote ulTRAX:

Feel free to keep your infantile pissing contest going. I'm through with this topic.

Praise the Lord, there is a Santa Clause.

hollygolightly's picture
hollygolightly
Joined:
Jul. 28, 2015 5:49 am

Regarding the actual weather now in California. The current rain is just what California needs due to our past not having enough rain and it resulting in a drought. This rain now looks like it will lessen the California drought, which is what California needs.

I am in favor of all states in the United States and even the so called red states. However, not all people think like this, especially the people that mix their religion with politics like we saw in the first century of Jesus Christ and we see today.

Mark the Shark's picture
Mark the Shark
Joined:
Nov. 18, 2011 3:02 pm
Quote hollygolightly:
Quote ulTRAX:

Feel free to keep your infantile pissing contest going. I'm through with this topic.

Praise the Lord, there is a Santa Clause.

++1

Quote ulTRAX:...This will be my last post to this thread on this topic. ...

It's hard to do but he always "folds like a cheap suit" if the community shines enough light on his foolishness.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

He ALWAYS returns. Its an addiction.

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Hey ABCee- big snow coming to Cali-- great opportunity for you to narrarate your imagined weather control after the fact. First need to come up with a reason "they" are going to relent on the drought a little bit. My idea: The HAARP satellite needs new batteries.

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Impeachment: The Difference Between Nixon & Trump

Thom plus logo There is a very simple reason why some Republicans participated in the impeachment proceedings against Richard Nixon, but none have so far broken ranks against Trump. That reason is the US Supreme Court.
Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system