Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

[mushulatubbee]

My neighbor is convinced global warming is directly related to his weight gain! Idk really!

 

[Floridian]

Now that's funny Musha lol!GK you're right of course I have no clue about your generosity toward others,how could I?But it does appear from your position that you have not contributed enough to satisfy your first world guilt.Or is it that you can't convince others to let you and other "climatologists" dig into their pockets to "level the field?"

 

[Genghis Kush]

nothing upsets me more than seeing nature ruined by human waste.

to me that is the greatest sin.

thats what motivates me.

 

[mushulatubbee]

I pick up random trash while i walk my dog......you should see the looks i get lmao!

 

[Betterhaff]

Hell, a lot of people don’t even bother to pick up their own dog’s droppings.

 

[Floridian]

Hell I don't even bother to pick up own!

 

[DocTim420]

How many of us not only pickup our own dog's poo...but pickup others'?

How many of us recycle bottles/cans? Separating them from trash and rolling out the blue recycle trash can to the curb doesn't count. I mean actually taking the empties to the recycle center for ca$h...along with scrap metal, old computers, etc.

When hiking in the mountains/valleys, spending a day at the beach, or camping in the boonies, how many of us carry out more trash then what we carried in?

I am guilty of doing all of the above. It is hard to change old habits, know what I mean?

 

[armedoldhippy]

How many of us not only pickup our own dog's poo...but pickup others'?

How many of us recycle bottles/cans? Separating them from trash and rolling out the blue recycle trash can to the curb doesn't count. I mean actually taking the empties to the recycle center for ca$h...along with scrap metal, old computers, etc.

When hiking in the mountains/valleys, spending a day at the beach, or camping in the boonies, how many of us carry out more trash then what we carried in?

I am guilty of doing all of the above. It is hard to change old habits, know what I mean?

i am constantly hauling shit out of the woods some lazy cocksucker tossed. i'll never understand how you can carry a full beer can three miles up a damn mountain, but are unable to stomp it flat & carry the empty back out. what the fuck is wrong with these morons?

 

[shithawk420]

i admit im guilty.but when you find bags of dead animals in your woods you kinda stop caring about beer cans.kinda lucky i didnt get killed.wierd ass rednecks in this world.

 

[DocTim420]

Amen brutha, stupidity at its best!

I bet you can't beat this one. While camping in the Eastern Sierras (in the boonies along one of the many rivers full of trout) two couples were tent camping just a bit down river from us. We shared our wine/beer (gotta deluxe travel trailer) and they shared some of the fresh trout (they over fished a bit) and we all exchanged doobies at the nightly campfire. Seemed like a nice bunch (even though they drove up in a tiny Prius).

Well, woke up one morning and they were gone...checked out their campsite and it was relatively clean. Looked in the back of my pickup truck and it was loaded with all their trash, lol. Half a dozen stinky garbage bags, 3 used sleeping bags, broken styrofoam cooler, foam mats, lots of shit...including and a bag of used sanitary napkins (lol...guess someone wasn't getting any nookie). WTF I say!

 

[mushulatubbee]

Redemption song!

Redemption song!

How many of us not only pickup our own dog's poo...but pickup others'?

How many of us recycle bottles/cans? Separating them from trash and rolling out the blue recycle trash can to the curb doesn't count. I mean actually taking the empties to the recycle center for ca$h...along with scrap metal, old computers, etc.

When hiking in the mountains/valleys, spending a day at the beach, or camping in the boonies, how many of us carry out more trash then what we carried in?

I am guilty of doing all of the above. It is hard to change old habits, know what I mean?

When i was growing up almost every place in town would either take empty bottles or cans/ or have a place close by that did. Some folks can make a living on collecting bottles this way.........new buis owners take over preexisting buis and all of a sudden theres like 2 places for a hundred square miles! There used to be one on every corner( like bars dont cha know) now it almost seemslike someone dosnt want the recycling taking place bymaking just hard enough that most folks say fzck it and just chuck em into regular recycling bins! Verysad practice eastcoast america! Id like to bitchslap whomever is responsible! Lol!
Ive heard some states offer 6cents a bottle. I could embrace a yr of 10 cents per bottle just to increase folks interest! Idk just tinking outloud i guess!

 

[igrowone]

the curse of too much, though i don't think people feel any wealthier these days
but some have absolutely no sense of cleaning up after themselves
i did see an interesting idea for all the plastic that ends up in the ocean
kind of a floating boom contraption
idea is that it floats with the current that drives the plastic into certain areas
it slowly spins and collects that plastic, be nice if it actually works in practice

 

[DocTim420]

I collect between $40-50 for each run (enough for 2 cases of Sculpin). Which usually is about 4 trash cans (25 gal size) of beer/wine bottles and 1 trash can for plastic (water bottles). Just the wifey and I, so it may take a few months before there is enough for a run (unless we have a party/BBQ).

 

[shithawk420]

WTF Doc?they just piled all their trash in your truck?thats plain rude.ive never done that kinda thing.i might have thrown a beer can on my own land but would never leave my trash like that.what a bunch of dicks

 

[DocTim420]

Yeah man...nice people then poof. They were gone and the back of my pickup became their dumpster.

We were in the boonies, so trash cans were not "plentiful". But still...yeah, it was rude. If they would have asked I would have said yes...and charged them a can of beer or a doob, lol.

Yep, but you can't beat that one...lol. Wifey did ask me, "what would I do if they left all the trash in their campsite?"...of course we know the answer to that one. Optimistically speaking...I guess you can say they saved me some work, as I did not have to pick up after them.

LOL...oh yeah, and since I question the logic of climate changers, I am supposed prefer pollution over clean air, drink dirty water, toss my trash in the wind, and leave the world in messier place than I found it. It is kinda funny.

 

[shithawk420]

jeez.you would probably call me a saint.damn neighbor kids always leaving their trash in my yard.sometimes i wanna freak out but its not worth it.damn kids hopped on ritalin.GET OFF MY LAWN!and im only 30!

by the way,old beer cans are the nastiest smelling things ive smelled next to piss.im actually trying to be a park ranger.but not looking forward to dirty,greasy ole camp sites

 

[trichrider]

 

[Floridian]

If folks are imterested in seeing the founder of the weather channel,a,scientist who explains thoroughly why there is a supposed "concensus" on global warming talk about the subject,it is on Liveleak.com on page two under the headline of CNN's ass whooping on the subject.A real eye opener to say the least.

 

[mushulatubbee]

Too many municipalities using pavement! This aint helping things stay kool! Ultimately the sun WILL destroy earth! Just a heads up!

 

[DocTim420]

EXCLUSIVE: Study Finds Temperature Adjustments Account For ‘Nearly All Of The Warming

EXCLUSIVE: Study Finds Temperature Adjustments Account For ‘Nearly All Of The Warming

Sometimes I hate being right. I have always said the NOAA adjustments to the temperature data set were suspect (hence NOAA refused to release certain information requested under FOIA)...and now my suspicions are confirmed with a new study. I guess we can call certain climate change "facts" to be now "fake news".

A new study found adjustments made to global surface temperature readings by scientists in recent years “are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data.”

“Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever – despite current claims of record setting warming,” according to a study published June 27 by two scientists and a veteran statistician.

The peer-reviewed study tried to validate current surface temperature datasets managed by NASA, NOAA and the UK’s Met Office, all of which make adjustments to raw thermometer readings. Skeptics of man-made global warming have criticized the adjustments.

Climate scientists often apply adjustments to surface temperature thermometers to account for “biases” in the data. The new study doesn’t question the adjustments themselves but notes nearly all of them increase the warming trend.

Basically, “cyclical pattern in the earlier reported data has very nearly been ‘adjusted’ out” of temperature readings taken from weather stations, buoys, ships and other sources.

In fact, almost all the surface temperature warming adjustments cool past temperatures and warm more current records, increasing the warming trend, according to the study’s authors.

“Nearly all of the warming they are now showing are in the adjustments,” Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo, a study co-author, told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an interview. “Each dataset pushed down the 1940s warming and pushed up the current warming.”

“You would think that when you make adjustments you’d sometimes get warming and sometimes get cooling. That’s almost never happened,” said D’Aleo, who co-authored the study with statistician James Wallace and Cato Institute climate scientist Craig Idso.

Their study found measurements “nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history,” which was “nearly always accomplished by systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature pattern.”

“The conclusive findings of this research are that the three [global average surface temperature] data sets are not a valid representation of reality,” the study found. “In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data.”

Based on these results, the study’s authors claim the science underpinning the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate greenhouse gases “is invalidated.”

The new study will be included in petitions by conservative groups to the EPA to reconsider the 2009 endangerment finding, which gave the agency its legal authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Sam Kazman, an attorney with the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), said the study added an “important new piece of evidence to this debate” over whether to reopen the endangerment finding. CEI petitioned EPA to reopen the endangerment finding in February.

“I think this adds a very strong new element to it,” Kazman told TheDCNF. “It’s enough reason to open things formally and open public comment on the charges we make.”

Since President Donald Trump ordered EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to review the Clean Power Plan, there’s been speculation the administration would reopen the endangerment finding to new scrutiny.

The Obama-era document used three lines of evidence to claim such emissions from vehicles “endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations.”

D’Aleo and Wallace filed a petition with EPA on behalf of their group, the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council (CHECC). They relied on past their past research, which found one of EPA’s lines of evidence “simply does not exist in the real world.”

Their 2016 study “failed to find that the steadily rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations have had a statistically significant impact on any of the 13 critically important temperature time series data analyzed.”

“In sum, all three of the lines of evidence relied upon by EPA to attribute warming to human GHG emissions are invalid,” reads CHCC’s petition. “The Endangerment Finding itself is therefore invalid and should be reconsidered.

Pruitt’s largely been silent on whether or not he would reopen the endangerment finding, but the administrator did say he was spearheading a red team exercise to tackle climate science.

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry also came out in favor of red-blue team exercises, which are used by the military and intelligence agencies to expose any vulnerabilities to systems or strategies.

Environmental activists and climate scientists largely panned the idea, with some even arguing it would be “dangerous” to elevate minority scientific opinions.

“Such calls for special teams of investigators are not about honest scientific debate,” wrote climate scientist Ben Santer and Kerry Emanuel and historian and activist Naomi Oreskes.

“They are dangerous attempts to elevate the status of minority opinions, and to undercut the legitimacy, objectivity and transparency of existing climate science,” the three wrote in a recent Washington Post op-ed.

“Frankly, I think you could do a red-blue team exercise as part of reviewing the endangerment finding,” Kazman said.

Though Kazman did warn a red team exercise could be a double-edged sword if not done correctly. He worries some scientists not supportive of the idea could undermine the process from the inside and use it to grandstand.

Source: https://dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/exclusive-study-finds-temperature-adjustments-account-for-nearly-all-of-the-warming-in-climate-data/

Abstract from study:

ABSTRACT
The objective of this research was to test the hypothesis that Global
Average Surface Temperature (GAST) data, produced by NOAA,
NASA, and HADLEY, are sufficiently credible estimates of global
average temperatures such that they can be relied upon for climate
modeling and policy analysis purposes. The relevance of this
research is that the validity of all three of the so- called Lines of
Evidence in EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding require GAST
data to be a valid representation of reality.
In this research report, the most important surface data adjustment
issues are identified and past changes in the previously reported
historical data are quantified. It was found that each new version of
GAST has nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend
over its entire history. And, it was nearly always accomplished by
systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature
pattern. This was true for all three entities providing GAST data
measurement, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU.
As a result, this research sought to validate the current estimates of
GAST using the best available relevant data. This included the best
documented and understood data sets from the U.S. and elsewhere
as well as global data from satellites that provide far more extensive
global coverage and are not contaminated by bad siting and
urbanization impacts. Satellite data integrity also benefits from having
cross checks with Balloon data.
The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data
sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of
their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical
temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and
credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to
conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years
have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting
warming.
Finally, since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for
EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these
research findings.

Actual study: https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf