Go Back   iRV2 Forums > iRV2.com COMMUNITY FORUMS > Just Conversation
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-02-2011, 04:48 PM   #127
Senior Member
 
Ray,IN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North America somewhere
Posts: 13,709
I would think that anyone who believes in the global warming theory has already sold, or considering selling their RV, cars,lawn mowers, furnace, etc, that are either fossil fueled, or electric that derive their power re-charging ability from fossil fuels, and already be powering these items from solar, wind, or nuclear . Would not to do otherwise be considered hypocritical?
__________________

__________________
2000 Winnebago Ultimate Freedom USQ40JD, ISC 8.3 Cummins 350, Spartan MM Chassis. USA 1SG, retired;PPA,Good Sam Life member,FMCA."We the people are the rightful masters of both the Congress and the Courts - not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution. "Abraham Lincoln"
Ray,IN is online now   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 01-02-2011, 04:55 PM   #128
Senior Member
 
Lindsay Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tavares, FL
Posts: 1,644
I might point out the following initial statement on your first paper.

This page is based on a brief synopsis of the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as well as NCDC's own data resources. It was prepared by David Easterling and Tom Karl, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, N.C. 28801.

Strange that you would complain about politics and then quote one of the most political reports ever written. If you have looked at global warming at all, you know that their reports are political and not scientific. These guys have been cught numerous times changing historical data and current temp. The chief is a joke. Without going thu everything, I also find it strange that they quote weaher stations when the data from them has been corrupted and homogenized. Read and see about the surface data here Home

NASA’s head climate chief (James Hansen) predicted before a senate committee in the late 80’s that by the year 2000 a billion people would be dead from global warming. This obviously didn’t happen and cooling is a bigger killer. He predicted as recent as 2007 that snow and ice would be gone in the NE part of the US. His computer models have been proven wrong. He called coal trains death and suggested that energy companies should be declared climate criminals and executed. The real crime is that he carries the NASA emblem and people think it is the real NASA that put astronauts on the moon. He is a loon. Much of the data from the NCDC was obtained from the CRU and was admitted to be unsubstantiated.
__________________

__________________
http://www.linandnancy.com
Lindsay Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 05:07 PM   #129
DFR
Senior Member
 
Evergreen Owners Club
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 260
I can't help but wonder how many of these "scientists" beliefs are governed by those who sign their paychecks, or pays for their research as it may be? Call me a skeptic.
__________________
2015 Evergreen Bayhill

340 RK
DFR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 05:12 PM   #130
Community Administrator
 
Route 66's Avatar


 
Newmar Owners Club
Retired Fire Service RVer's
Spartan Chassis
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 25,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by DFR View Post
I can't help but wonder how many of these "scientists" beliefs are governed by those who sign their paychecks, or pays for their research as it may be? Call me a skeptic.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
__________________
Adios, Dirk - '84 Real Lite Truck Camper, '86 Wilderness Cimarron TT, previously 4 years as a fulltimer in a '07 DSDP

Route 66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 05:32 PM   #131
Moderator Emeritus
 
Hudsoner's Avatar


 
Thor Owners Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Wisconsin suburbs of the Twin Cities
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray,IN View Post
I would think that anyone who believes in the global warming theory has already sold, or considering selling their RV, cars,lawn mowers, furnace, etc, that are either fossil fueled, or electric that derive their power re-charging ability from fossil fuels, and already be powering these items from solar, wind, or nuclear . Would not to do otherwise be considered hypocritical?
Why that? I am in the process of buying a Class A, and one believ does not necessarily exclude the other. There are many other ways, to help to reduce global warming, palatine a lot of trees is only one of them. I will increase my carbon footstep with a MH, but I have reduced it already with my solar installation and other measures.
__________________
Hudsoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 05:34 PM   #132
Moderator Emeritus
 
Hudsoner's Avatar


 
Thor Owners Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Wisconsin suburbs of the Twin Cities
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindsay Richards View Post
I might point out the following initial statement on your first paper.

This page is based on a brief synopsis of the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as well as NCDC's own data resources. It was prepared by David Easterling and Tom Karl, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, N.C. 28801.

Strange that you would complain about politics and then quote one of the most political reports ever written. If you have looked at global warming at all, you know that their reports are political and not scientific. These guys have been cught numerous times changing historical data and current temp. The chief is a joke. Without going thu everything, I also find it strange that they quote weaher stations when the data from them has been corrupted and homogenized. Read and see about the surface data here Home

NASA’s head climate chief (James Hansen) predicted before a senate committee in the late 80’s that by the year 2000 a billion people would be dead from global warming. This obviously didn’t happen and cooling is a bigger killer. He predicted as recent as 2007 that snow and ice would be gone in the NE part of the US. His computer models have been proven wrong. He called coal trains death and suggested that energy companies should be declared climate criminals and executed. The real crime is that he carries the NASA emblem and people think it is the real NASA that put astronauts on the moon. He is a loon. Much of the data from the NCDC was obtained from the CRU and was admitted to be unsubstantiated.
I posted it as an example to show that NASA Scientists can have opposing opinions (your paper quoted some NASA persons)
__________________
Hudsoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 05:38 PM   #133
Moderator Emeritus
 
Hudsoner's Avatar


 
Thor Owners Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Wisconsin suburbs of the Twin Cities
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by DFR View Post
I can't help but wonder how many of these "scientists" beliefs are governed by those who sign their paychecks, or pays for their research as it may be? Call me a skeptic.
If the papers underwent a proper peer review, one can be pretty sure that they are as neutral as possible. The peers that often are paid by the competition will have made sure that biases will have been eliminated!

Most of the papers that are published in scientific media underwent a peer review (as are most papers that are published by university staff).
__________________
Hudsoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 05:51 PM   #134
Senior Member
 
Vegasdan's Avatar
 
National RV Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudsoner View Post
Why that? I am in the process of buying a Class A, and one believ does not necessarily exclude the other. There are many other ways, to help to reduce global warming, palatine a lot of trees is only one of them. I will increase my carbon footstep with a MH, but I have reduced it already with my solar installation and other measures.
What?
__________________
2001 National Tradewinds 7370 300 Cat
2011 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sport
Officially fulltiming. The Journey Begins
Vegasdan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 05:53 PM   #135
Senior Member
 
Lindsay Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tavares, FL
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
If the papers underwent a proper peer review, one can be pretty sure that they are as neutral as possible. The peers that often are paid by the competition will have made sure that biases will have been eliminated!

Most of the papers that are published in scientific media underwent a peer review (as are most papers that are published by university staff).
You have obviously never read about the Climategate scandal at the CRU (the number 1 climate facility in the world) and the joke of peer reviewed climate papers. The famous "hockey stick" paper was the mainstay of Al Gore's movie was peer reviewed and then discredited and left off the last several IPPC papers. When people are getting millions of doctors for proving their perspective. The head of the GRU and lead UN Climate author admitted in the leaked emails that they scammed the peer review. It is all about the millions of dollars in research money and the prestige. It is all falling apart now.
__________________
http://www.linandnancy.com
Lindsay Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 06:11 PM   #136
Moderator Emeritus
 
Hudsoner's Avatar


 
Thor Owners Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Wisconsin suburbs of the Twin Cities
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegasdan View Post
What?
What, what? That I plan to buy a MH?
__________________
Hudsoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 06:18 PM   #137
Moderator Emeritus
 
Hudsoner's Avatar


 
Thor Owners Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Wisconsin suburbs of the Twin Cities
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindsay Richards View Post
You have obviously never read about the Climategate scandal at the CRU (the number 1 climate facility in the world) and the joke of peer reviewed climate papers. The famous "hockey stick" paper was the mainstay of Al Gore's movie was peer reviewed and then discredited and left off the last several IPPC papers. When people are getting millions of doctors for proving their perspective. The head of the GRU and lead UN Climate author admitted in the leaked emails that they scammed the peer review. It is all about the millions of dollars in research money and the prestige. It is all falling apart now.
Yes I think I did, the papers that were slightly modified by the British researchers? What they did was wrong, but had actually no real influence on the data! I am not aware that the incident had any influencing change on the general picture. And I have not come across anything that indicates that it is "falling apart" now.

But I will end my involvement in this discussion here, because it is no fun to do this, if some other writers are not willing to write more than a few low hitting remarks.

Good night all!
__________________
Hudsoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 06:21 PM   #138
Senior Member
 
Vegasdan's Avatar
 
National RV Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudsoner View Post
What, what? That I plan to buy a MH?
I'm finding it hard to follow your spelling. What does "palatine" mean? And I find it hard to believe you are serious about buying a vehicle that gets less than 10 MPG and has such a huge "carbon footprint" with your views about man made "global climate change". It's like someone who would be against hunting and then going out to buy a deer rifle. Sorry, but that's just the way I see it.
__________________
2001 National Tradewinds 7370 300 Cat
2011 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sport
Officially fulltiming. The Journey Begins
Vegasdan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 06:25 PM   #139
Senior Member
 
Lindsay Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tavares, FL
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Yes I think I did, the papers that were slightly modified by the British researchers? What they did was wrong, but had actually no real influence on the data! I am not aware that the incident had any influencing change on the general picture.
Now that is really funny.
__________________
http://www.linandnancy.com
Lindsay Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 08:18 PM   #140
Senior Member
 
Gary - K7GLD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudsoner View Post
I don't care for articles like this, because the use emotions and polemic to get their point accross.
I don't like it from either side of the spectrum to write like this (i.e. when pro global warming articles come with the poor polar bears dying).
I like facts and figures an a neutral analysis of those.
YUP - folks usually disagree with both the views of columnists - OR those of genuine experts whose views counter their own - which was basically my intended point - the "experts" YOU accept and quote are quite likely NOT the ones I, or those like me, will accept.

Glibly accepting - and then quoting - the "data" from government funded climatologists whose "research" has abundantly shown to be slanted, distorted - and outright LIED about, requires far more faith - or gullibility -than I possess. Research "judged by peers"? Give me a BREAK! WHAT "peers", those cut from the same government-funded piece of cloth who ALSO rely on their living by supporting what that government TELLS them to, IF they want continued government funding?

"Research and data gathering"? And exactly how reliable is that? How's about we remove 100 temperature monitors in Siberia - and increase the ones in the Sahara by the same amount? OH YEAH - we'll certainly get data, and data our fellow peers will gaily support - but is that "data" a realistic indication of what's really happening - or merely a reflection of what those who stand to profit WANT it to look like?

Sure, I've read enough from varied sources to have pretty well come to a conclusion - and those who support the global warming theory wouldn't change their mind if they were literally BURIED under countering data.

1. Climate change? YOU BET - been going on since this world began, did it LONG before there were factories or motor vehicles - and will CONTINUE to change as long as the earth remains.

2. Humans and their devices "change climate" - perhaps to a small degree as compared to the MASSIVE natural effects of nature as related to a number of known and uncontrollable events such as volcanoes, ozone produced by lightening strikes - and yeah even the farts of 2 and 4-legged creatures...

3. We can somehow "buy or spend" our way out of, or stop climate change? Oh sure increased taxes, and putting stuff on or taking it off our vehicles and factories will do the job... And exactly how MUCH of my Florida swampland ARE you wanting to buy?

As far as I'm concerned, I'll stand by my earlier statement - take out the politics and profit-making aspect that stand to make a very few, very RICH at the expense of the many, and this issue would die and be abandoned overnight!
__________________

__________________
John Day....|'88 Winnebago Super Chief 27ft. Class A
Eastern .....|'88 KIT model 240 24 ft. 5er
Oregon ......|'02 Dodge/Cummins 2500 Quad Cab
Gary - K7GLD is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Questions....lots of questions..... C Johnson Class C Motorhome Discussions 20 11-02-2010 08:00 AM
global warming uinahurry RV'ing Humor & Crazy but True Stories 2 02-18-2010 12:02 AM
Questions, questions! Hope you can help? Born2RV Fleetwood Products Owner's Forum 5 08-31-2009 06:53 PM
Global Warming?? brad03ca Canada Region 1 12-02-2007 12:12 PM
SCIENTISTS DEBUNK "GLOBAL WARMING". Jayco1 Just Conversation 40 04-05-2007 05:46 PM

» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.