2014 was World's Warmest Year on Record

[Crowns&Laurels]

You guys seem most annoyed because of all the studies regarding global warming. And now the classic "yes it's the hottest year on record, but we don't think so, because it wasn't hottest enough."

Sounds about how you all reconcile the argument "it's zero degrees outside, with four feet of snow".

Scientists are more worried about a one in a billion chance of an asteroid hitting Earth then global warming. The last protestor I have known to be for global warming was on Cops- he was riding around naked on a bike with a big sign saying "let's adapt to climate change".

Way to go, liberals :rotfl:

 

[The Barbarian]

Sounds about how you all reconcile the argument "it's zero degrees outside, with four feet of snow".

So it's "we still get cold in the winter, sometimes, so we don't have to worry about global warming." I wonder if any of those guys saying stuff like that, actually think rational people are convinced by it.

Scientists are more worried about a one in a billion chance of an asteroid hitting Earth then global warming.

Since you can apparently operate a keyboard, I have a hard time believing you're really that dumb.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

 

[Alate_One]

Sounds about how you all reconcile the argument "it's zero degrees outside, with four feet of snow".

Global warming doesn't mean the entire earth is going to turn balmy warm at all seasons. It means the average temperature on earth increases by a few degrees. It doesn't sound like much but it creates larger natural disasters than normal and changes climate enough to alter where crops are grown.

 

[genuineoriginal]

See above. Even that far back, scientists were overwhelmingly concerned about global warming.

I see carbon taxers like to rewrite history
:nono:

 

[genuineoriginal]

Global warming doesn't mean the entire earth is going to turn balmy warm at all seasons. It means the average temperature on earth increases by a few degrees. It doesn't sound like much but it creates larger natural disasters than normal and changes climate enough to alter where crops are grown.

So we will be able to buy our crops from Canada and Siberia?
With their long daylight hours and the warmer temperatures and the soil that hasn't been overworked?
The future is looking up.

Of course, crops can still be grown in the USA with the right "green" technology regardless of whether the weather is hot or cold, as long as we keep the carbon taxers from destroying our economy.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
See above. Even that far back, scientists were overwhelmingly concerned about global warming.

I see carbon taxers like to rewrite history

It's just a fact that deniers have lied about the supposed consensus of cooling:
Contrary to what Crichton, Dobbs, and others might assert, climate scientists never agreed that the Earth was destined for long-term cooling back in the 1970s. Yes, the Earth cooled between 1940 and 1970, but it was exceedingly slight. Scientists now agree that the cooling resulted from excessive use of sulfur-based aerosols. Aerosols only remain in the atmosphere for a short period of time compared to other greenhouse gases, so the aerosol cooling effect faded away as atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations rose. Knowing this, the majority of climate scientists at the time still anticipated warming. A review of climate change literature between 1965 and 1979, undertaken in 2008, found that 44 papers "predicted, implied, or provided supporting evidence" for global warming, while only seven did so for global cooling.

"Global cooling was never more than a minor aspect of the scientific climate change literature of the era, let alone the scientific consensus..." the reviewers remarked.

And I see you're back to your old habits, lying about what other people believe. It's kind of a compulsion for you, isn't it?

Didn't getting caught the last few times, teach you anything?

 

[The Barbarian]

So we will be able to buy our crops from Canada and Siberia?

Not likely. The tundra and taiga are not very fertile soils. Forests are notoriously poor for growing crops.

Due to this, soil forms very slowly in the taiga. The soil that does form has a very high acid content. This is because the acid in conifer needles is released into the soil as they decompose. As a result, the soil is very infertile and very few plants can grow.
http://taigagirlz.blogspot.com/2009/02/soil-and-land-formation-in-taiga.html

You have no idea what you're talking about, as usual.

 

[genuineoriginal]

A review of climate change literature between 1965 and 1979, undertaken in 2008, found that 44 papers "predicted, implied, or provided supporting evidence" for global warming, while only seven did so for global cooling.

Yes, I have heard that lie

However, the carbon taxers that produced that lie have included "implied" and "provided supporting evidence" in order to reach the false figure of 44 papers, since the "implied" and "provided supporting evidence" is merely what they assumed the papers said due to conformation bias.

 

[The Barbarian]

And in the end, G.O. accuses other people of doing what he does. Pretending I believe things that I don't, and then accusing others of lying is your M.O.

Do you think no one notices?

 

[genuineoriginal]

This message is hidden because The Barbarian is a :troll:.

 

[Alate_One]

So we will be able to buy our crops from Canada and Siberia?
With their long daylight hours and the warmer temperatures and the soil that hasn't been overworked?
The future is looking up.

But we become net importers of food, instead of just oil. Is that what you want? How would we compete with the world if we can't grow enough food?

Of course I have family in Canada, so I can flee if necessary.

Of course, crops can still be grown in the USA with the right "green" technology regardless of whether the weather is hot or cold, as long as we keep the carbon taxers from destroying our economy.

Can still be grown and can be economically grown are two different things, carbon taxes or no. Gro domes aren't going to be economical on the scale that would replicate our current food production.

Kinda hard to grow crops if there's no water. Ask California.

There's also the issue of the fossil water of the Ogalalla. What will the US do when it runs out?

 

[Bright Raven]

Because Obama said So?

 

[Stripe]

Because Obama said So?

Who is Obama? :idunno:

 

[genuineoriginal]

Can still be grown and can be economically grown are two different things, carbon taxes or no. Gro domes aren't going to be economical on the scale that would replicate our current food production.

Kinda hard to grow crops if there's no water. Ask California.

Plants grown in a field will often produce 2.5 pounds per square foot per year. In a Monolithic Grow Dome those same plants will produce 200 to 300 pounds per square foot per year. And they will do that with 10% less water and nutrients.
source​

 

[The Barbarian]

Since farmers and agricultural conglomerates are constantly trying to find ways to raise yields, it sounds like you're stuffed with prunes.

There are lots of inefficient ways to pump production of food that cost more than they return. Looks like your dome is one of them.

 

[User Name]

Plants grown in a field will often produce 2.5 pounds per square foot per year. In a Monolithic Grow Dome those same plants will produce 200 to 300 pounds per square foot per year. And they will do that with 10% less water and nutrients.
source​

Check this out: http://www.gereports.com/post/91250246340/lettuce-see-the-future-japanese-farmer-builds

A factory farm in Japan produces 10,000 heads of lettuce per day by using LED lights that were developed to emit light at wavelengths optimal for plant growth. By controlling the environment at optimal levels, they are able to make the plants grow 2.5 times faster and produce a 100-fold increase compared with using ordinary farming methods. They have also cut water usage down to one percent of outdoor farming.

 

[The Barbarian]

A factory farm in Japan produces nice clean watermelons that are square, from being formed in containers.

Takes less water, and they grow faster indoors.

Oh, the watermelons cost $75.00. Just think if we could apply that technology to wheat. Hundred-dollar loaves of bread.

 

[User Name]

Oh, the watermelons cost $75.00. Just think if we could apply that technology to wheat. Hundred-dollar loaves of bread.

How old is that data? The indoor farming being done now is economically viable:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/07/140717-japan-largest-indoor-plant-factory-food/

There is a plant factory in Atlanta called Podponics that is currently shipping over 1 ton of lettuce per day to Whole Foods, the Fresh Market, and Krogers in 7 states.

 

[The Barbarian]

We're set for lettuce, then. But corn and wheat, or rice? Show us that. Remember, competitive with normal farming. The world survives mostly on grains.

 

[User Name]

We're set for lettuce, then. But corn and wheat, or rice? Show us that. Remember, competitive with normal farming. The world survives mostly on grains.

True. Well it's lettuce for now, with plans for mass-producing other green leafys. Baby steps.