Wow, have you seen the Price of corn!!!

[LightningCrash]

If the earth is warming, doesn't that mean more water is evaporating from lakes and rivers, which would put more moisture into the atmosphere, which would result in more rain?
I'm not a scientist, so I dont know.

Some climatologist was saying that a lot of places will see more drought, while higher latitudes like Alaska and Scandinavia will become more moist.

Here in OKC we're seeing a trend towards fewer rainy days and almost no foggy days. Who knows how long that will hold up. It's not necessarily related to climate change.

 

[Jwryan84]

I want oil to go up too. My well keeps making less and less.

 

[ssgt ben]

Who baits deer? I just try to give them a snack, you know a little something different to help them poor starving critters out.

 

[farmerbyron]

Some climatologist was saying that a lot of places will see more drought, while higher latitudes like Alaska and Scandinavia will become more moist.

So some places will be unusually hotter and drier while other places will receive more rainfall and be cooler. Those guys are freaking geniuses. It's not like that has ever happened before.

Really the GW agenda resembles the 9/11 truthers and the birthers. Looking at vast amounts of data and picking out the facts they like to advance their agenda. Ignore any data contrary to the conclusion that you want and belittle any opposition.

 

[LightningCrash]

So some places will be unusually hotter and drier while other places will receive more rainfall and be cooler. Those guys are freaking geniuses. It's not like that has ever happened before.

Rain happens all the time, this means that all meteorology is a joke.

You assume they cherry pick, because their opinion and models do not agree with your preformed conclusion. If you'd like to demonstrate how you believe that they cherry pick data and models, we can discuss that. Obviously you're not persecuted and you're certainly not belittled for any ignorance.

One thing I have questions about is the effect of the 2008 Recession on airborne CO2. Emissions went down across the board in 2009, but what data I've found didn't see any improvement in CO2 PPM (https://jameswight.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/co2_trend_mlo.png).
Of course we caught right back up in GHG emissions for 2010/2011.

 

[Keelty]

I think its all OSA Admin's fault

 

[purplehaze]

wake up sheeple the government is ruining your weather

This is just the way things are gonna be till sheeple wake up and do something about this miserable weather we've been having.

 

[farmerbyron]

Rain happens all the time, this means that all meteorology is a joke.

You assume they cherry pick, because their opinion and models do not agree with your preformed conclusion. If you'd like to demonstrate how you believe that they cherry pick data and models, we can discuss that. Obviously you're not persecuted and you're certainly not belittled for any ignorance.

One thing I have questions about is the effect of the 2008 Recession on airborne CO2. Emissions went down across the board in 2009, but what data I've found didn't see any improvement in CO2 PPM (https://jameswight.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/co2_trend_mlo.png).
Of course we caught right back up in GHG emissions for 2010/2011.

LC, just look at the past few winters where we had the largest percentage of snow cover in the US. Also, all the record low temps in the winter of 10/11. Now I know you cannot prove or disprove a trend based on statistical anomalies but remember what the GW crowd was saying? They were saying that the record cold and snow was proof of GW. So basically no matter what the weather, they will claim and manipulate data to try and bolster their theory.

Also, if the GW people were serious about CO2 concerns, they would be rabid in their support of nuclear energy. It is the only 0 carbon source of energy capable of meeting demand. Instead the GW crowd pushes solutions like cap and trade, wind, solar, and conservation. They are not proposing serious solutions but rather political ones.

Look, I don't have a problem with wind or solar power but that is not a source that will replace fossil fuels and I don't think many people are willing to go back to living like the Amish to save mother earth. So yes I am very skeptical of the GW movement based on their lack of solutions and irrefutable evidence that our current weather is unprecedented.

We could cut back and ride bikes and use candles, then one volcano will erupt and spew out a decades worth of CO2 and make it a moot point. We are not as big and important as we may think we are to mother earth.

 

[reddog1]

Humans have very little if nothing to do with the CO2 levels on this planet.

Global Warming is a fraud used to gain power by the world elite.

As been would say.... "It's all part of the plan"

EPA has also ruled that hay dust is a pollutant (adds a per bale tax).... details at 11

 

[71buickfreak]

Just FYI to all the anti-ethanol people: the corn used for ethanol production is sold off as cattle feed, the same corn that would have otherwise just been sold as cattle feed in the first damn place. Ethanol is not a bad thing, it is not as corrosive as some would have you believe. in 10 and 15% levels, there is not enough content to do any damage, that is BS. E85 is 85% ethanol, now that stuff requires different types of hoses and pumps in your car, but that is it. Most new cars are compatible with it. On top of all that, I have done the research and testing myself- my van got 2-3 MPGs better when running ethanol over straight gas. I have verified this with several tests.