The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

[cfbandyman]

[sonofdaxjones]

The 300,000 plus birds (that's way low, BTW) who are killed every year by wind turbines (and growing) don't care about oil spills.

But it's good to see scientists have dumbed it down to say wind turbines kill fewer birds than radio and cell towers.   Whew, that's good, right?

I'm thinking a variation of a line from one of my favorite lines applies  here, "Only 300,000 plus killed, depending on the breaks"..

[mocat]

can someone explain oil spills to me? like i understand that they might happen every once in a long while, but why are they like all the effing time type deals?

[mocat]

maybe this guy is in charge of transporting all oil on earth?

[Emo EMAW]

can someone explain oil spills to me? like i understand that they might happen every once in a long while, but why are they like all the effing time type deals?

Well just think, every 3000 or so miles you get your oil changed and that old oil has to go somewhere.  In the creek is as good a place as any.

[Emo EMAW]

What does the Kansas is a wasteland argument have to do with anything?

It was in the context of desertification and shifting growing zones.  As temperatures rise and rainfall patterns become more sporadic/intense, large areas of kansas will essentially become fringe desert.  That coupled with a likely northward shift of growing zones, much of the heartland will no longer be fertile cropland.  I believe ag scientists at k-state have been looking at crop yields based on rising temperatures actually.  Just did a search and found this article which I read a couple years ago. http://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/feb15/climatewheat21815.html

Really makes you wonder how states like Texas and Oklahoma have any agriculture at all really.  Or rough ridin' Mexico.

Aquifers and irrigation for the western areas.  same as western Kansas.  Half of Mexico is in the tropics and the Sierra Madre range provides an agricultural region in northern mexico in the same way the Sierra Nevadas provide for the Central Valley.

Do you even dry land wheat bro? 

[halfEmpty]

What does the Kansas is a wasteland argument have to do with anything?

It was in the context of desertification and shifting growing zones.  As temperatures rise and rainfall patterns become more sporadic/intense, large areas of kansas will essentially become fringe desert.  That coupled with a likely northward shift of growing zones, much of the heartland will no longer be fertile cropland.  I believe ag scientists at k-state have been looking at crop yields based on rising temperatures actually.  Just did a search and found this article which I read a couple years ago. http://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/feb15/climatewheat21815.html

Really makes you wonder how states like Texas and Oklahoma have any agriculture at all really.  Or rough ridin' Mexico.

Aquifers and irrigation for the western areas.  same as western Kansas.  Half of Mexico is in the tropics and the Sierra Madre range provides an agricultural region in northern mexico in the same way the Sierra Nevadas provide for the Central Valley.

Do you even dry land wheat bro?

Or any other dry land crop?  I guess i should ask what's your point?

[ednksu]

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/03/518323094/rise-in-smog-in-western-u-s-is-blamed-on-asias-air-pollution?sc=tw

see guys, lets just stop trying.  the only thing I'd like to see come over the air from Asia is the sweet smell of napalm in the morning.

[cfbandyman]

The 300,000 plus birds (that's way low, BTW) who are killed every year by wind turbines (and growing) don't care about oil spills.

But it's good to see scientists have dumbed it down to say wind turbines kill fewer birds than radio and cell towers.   Whew, that's good, right?

I'm thinking a variation of a line from one of my favorite lines applies  here, "Only 300,000 plus killed, depending on the breaks"..

I know dax doesnt post here anymore. But I wanted him to repsond to it, cause why it is indeed, tragic to have any number of birds killed by wind turbines, 300k-1 million. If you care about the birds so much, you should ban this guy:



who is responsible for 1.3 to 4 billion bird deaths a year. So yes, not saying I like that birds are killed by wind turbines, but 300k vs 3.5 billion? mere drop in a very large bucket do to what cats freaking do.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/cats-kill-more-one-billion-birds-each-year

[Emo EMAW]

I'm okay with regulating cats, and that's assuming we must have them in the first place.  I would rather they all be gone.

[SdK]

Get out of here, Emo. Cats are the best. This whole blog exists due to cat fanship. Just get out out here.

(Typed by my cat, Sasha the gorgeous Himalayan. This in parentheses was typed by me, the gorgeous narcissist)

[Emo EMAW]

Sasha aka the bird exterminator. 

[SdK]

Haha more like rabbit killer.

[SdK]

There are so many rabbits here, birds too. Sasha prefers rabbits though

[camKSU]

This rough ridin' guy... 

Not sure if he actually believes the crap that comes out of his mouth or if he is just trolling us at the expense of the environment to ensure O&G, E&P profits. 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html

 

[AbeFroman]

All that matters is pdding his bank account. Typical Trumpublican

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

I really really like this Pruitt guy. He's doing wonderful things for this country.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

This rough ridin' guy... 

Not sure if he actually believes the crap that comes out of his mouth or if he is just trolling us at the expense of the environment to ensure O&G, E&P profits. 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html

 

"I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it's a primary contributor to the global warming that we see," he told CNBC's "Squawk Box."

So if you disagree with this comment, go ahead and tell me: how much have manmade CO2 emissions warmed the planet? What's "the 97% consensus" on that question? (Credit will not be awarded for answers like "a lot" or "shut up.")

[sonofdaxjones]

U.S. CO2 emissions now at lowest point in the last 35 years, but according to warmist-alarmist-propagandists it just keeps getting warmer (of course when NOAA keeps adjusting the past lower to make the present look warmer while using flawed computer programs to analyze current data).

Never have gotten or seen the answer to how many PPM of CO2 we actually need to be at, in order to make everything "perfect" (you know, like when we were being told we were headed straight into another ice age), like it was before warmist-alarmist-propagandists exerting their propaganda driven political agenda.

[renocat]

When we started keeping weather records we were plowing up the prairie.  This has caused more global warming than anything.  Global warmers need to quit eating or be gluttonous beef eaters so we can plant cropland to range and make money raisings meatmoos.   Get rid of profiting off of carbon, and this kick would dry up.  Obama enriched a bunch of people hyping the carbon hysteria.

[ednksu]

I'm always amazed at people comparing a million dollar industry to a trillion dollar industry and saying the former has more to protect.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Pruitt   

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

This rough ridin' guy... 

Not sure if he actually believes the crap that comes out of his mouth or if he is just trolling us at the expense of the environment to ensure O&G, E&P profits. 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html

 

"I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it's a primary contributor to the global warming that we see," he told CNBC's "Squawk Box."

So if you disagree with this comment, go ahead and tell me: how much have manmade CO2 emissions warmed the planet? What's "the 97% consensus" on that question? (Credit will not be awarded for answers like "a lot" or "shut up.")

 

[AbeFroman]

I don't know the answer to that question KSUW but I do support finding the answer, and cutting all the funding so we can't answer the question isn't a good idea IMO

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I don't know the answer to that question KSUW but I do support finding the answer, and cutting all the funding so we can't answer the question isn't a good idea IMO

Well I'll make you a deal. Liberals stuff all their sanctimonious drivel about "the 97%" and how we need to dramatically curb CO2 emissions and the EPA should be regulating carbon emissions based on the "Clean Air Act" and in exchange, conservatives will shell out $100mil in tax dollars to keep studying climate. Let's make a deal! I'm all for science - I'm against people claiming that (a) we know something that we don't, and (b) we need to do all sorts of stuff that conveniently fit the liberal agenda because of part (a).