Banning the term climate change won’t stop the reality

[Chu Gai]

Don't trust anything from that source. It's run by douche bag Extraordinaire Tucker Carlson and his right wingers. That being said, Obama hasn't exactly been a good environmental president.

Being that Walgreens doesn't ask what side of the political spectrum you are should you buy a douchebag, that mantle can be worn by anybody. Regardless, a claim was made that if the US lowers their emissions by an amount stated by Preident Obama, that the consequence would be a reduction in global temperature by a given amount. Cause and effect, right? Presumably, whoever ran the numbers, did so using an equation based on a climate model. So, where is corresponding rebuttal from from the sundry global warming left leaning segments that disputes that number? Because the way I currently see it it's like you've got this giant pool that holds 1000 people and studies have shown that there's a problem with the water because people are pissing in it. Somehow, the chlorine system is just being overwhelmed by the amount of urine in the water. All the families whose kids use the pool agree. So, the President of the Pool Association removes one child and then claims that as promised, he's done something about it. Those who support the President say he's a man of his word, a man of science, a man of principal, a man of action. So where are the numbers?

 

[Rickster71]

WE have temperate data for for 100's of thousands of years. Honestly did you research any of this before making statements like that? The Earth will survive regardless. The only thing we can do is hurt ourselves by not having the foresight to change and/or adapt.

Still wrong, again.
I was comparing the 4.5 billion year old planet and its fluctuating temps, to the extremely short duration of Al Gore's "Rapid Rise" graph that you've been hanging your hat on.
The sample size is too small when compared to 4.5 Billion years.
It's nothing more than a guess.
They never, ever measured The Rate of change over 4.5 Billion years to see how it compared to Gore's miniscule, cherry picked "Rapid Rise" snap shot.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Thats the whole point.. gluten sensitivity. If your not sensitive to wheat, then there is little point of going off of wheat unless one is on a diet and wants to reduce starch intake such as wheat and potatoes.

But that appears to be the only valid point made in the book. He makes a a whole lot more allegations about wheat that are completely bogus, or just not supported by any studies. Here's just one source of criticism:

http://www.aaccnet.org/publications/plexus/cfw/pastissues/2012/OpenDocuments/CFW-57-4-0177.pdf

 

[TheWarrior]

I can't blame the Obama administration for blocking a pipeline from Alberta. After all, there aren't any voters there that he need concern himself with. It shores up support from the environmentalist sector. And, it allows coal mining and power generation to fly under the radar, even though it has a greater environmental impact than the oil sands. Plus, the current boom in US oil production is a result of fracking - which isn't free from controversy itself.

Lol, you brought in too many unique angles to the environment 'umbrella.' The pipeline ruins the habitats of animals. Coal ruins the atmosphere. Fracking has increased seismic activity hundreds of times over. Oil sands require extensive refining that is costly, both financially and to the environment by means of the energy required. A warming climate has seen pine beetles racing east, and they've been ravaging Canadian forests as well. And while the cutting and burning has helped slow their progression, that too has its atmospheric impact.

We just need to stop. Everything. Slow the frick down folks. There's billions of us. Think about whats good for the world!!! Otherwise we're all screwed....

 

[3db]

But that appears to be the only valid point made in the book. He makes a a whole lot more allegations about wheat that are completely bogus, or just not supported by any studies. Here's just one source of criticism:

http://www.aaccnet.org/publications/plexus/cfw/pastissues/2012/OpenDocuments/CFW-57-4-0177.pdf

I don't agree with everything he writes in this book. However, the ingestion of GMO wheat has caused a gluten sensitivity to spring up that wasn't there in the numbers that we see today. I'm one of the fortunate ones as it doesn't affect me. My wife and elder daughter are affected by it.

 

[Irvrobinson]

We just need to stop. Everything. Slow the frick down folks. There's billions of us. Think about whats good for the world!!! Otherwise we're all screwed....

Yeah, let's just all hold hands and hum the melody to the 4th movement of Beethoven's 9th Symphony while Morgan Freeman recites To Joy in the original German.

Alright, I overcooked that one.

We just need to stop everything? You might want to rethink that a bit, ya know, to avoid economic collapse and starvation.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I don't agree with everything he writes in this book. However, the ingestion of GMO wheat has caused a gluten sensitivity to spring up that wasn't there in the numbers that we see today. I'm one of the fortunate ones as it doesn't affect me. My wife and elder daughter are affected by it.

Still on that mythical GMO wheat, eh?

 

[GO-NAD!]

I don't agree with everything he writes in this book. However, the ingestion of GMO wheat has caused a gluten sensitivity to spring up that wasn't there in the numbers that we see today. I'm one of the fortunate ones as it doesn't affect me. My wife and elder daughter are affected by it.

I haven't seen the statistics to refute that, so I won't argue that point. I just know that nobody in my family has any gluten issues - which is a good thing, because I lovvvvve bread. I do know that a lot of people are needlessy cutting gluten out of their diets, because of all the anti-gluten propaganda flying around. Of course, food producers are jumping on the bandwagon, by producing over-priced "gluten-free" products. If the ladies in your family have genuine issues with gluten, they have my sympathy.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Lol, you brought in too many unique angles to the environment 'umbrella.' The pipeline ruins the habitats of animals. Coal ruins the atmosphere. Fracking has increased seismic activity hundreds of times over. Oil sands require extensive refining that is costly, both financially and to the environment by means of the energy required. A warming climate has seen pine beetles racing east, and they've been ravaging Canadian forests as well. And while the cutting and burning has helped slow their progression, that too has its atmospheric impact.

We just need to stop. Everything. Slow the frick down folks. There's billions of us. Think about whats good for the world!!! Otherwise we're all screwed....

If only it was that easy.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I haven't seen the statistics to refute that, so I won't argue that point.

You folks are so difficult. Try this link:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/wheat/background.aspx

And the relevant quote from that page:

U.S. food processors are wary of consumer reaction to products containing genetically modified (GM) wheat, so no GM wheat is commercially grown in the United States.

 

[ski2xblack]

I do know that a lotf people are needlessy cutting gluten out of their diets, because of all the anti-gluten propaganda flying around. Of course, food producers are jumping on the bandwagon, by producing over-priced "gluten-free" products.

QFT. It's essentially similar to Monster's business plan: hype and pseudoscience marketing, applied to food. The folks who actually have Celiac disease are but a tiny fraction of the number of folks on the anti-gluten bandwagon. It makes a mockery of those truly afflicted with disease, and it's all about making a buck. Bandits exploiting the helpless.

Sorry, end rant.

 

[gene]

Still wrong, again.
I was comparing the 4.5 billion year old planet and its fluctuating temps, to the extremely short duration of Al Gore's "Rapid Rise" graph that you've been hanging your hat on.
The sample size is too small when compared to 4.5 Billion years.
It's nothing more than a guess.
They never, ever measured The Rate of change over 4.5 Billion years to see how it compared to Gore's miniscule, cherry picked "Rapid Rise" snap shot.

There is little point continuing to debate this topic with you since you have already made up your mind long before this thread existed. Al Gore doesn't own climate change. I know that's a great right wing talking point to add to the circle of confusion. Just b/c you don't believe the reality of the data studied by numerous 3rd parties to come to a scientific world wide consensus among real climate scientists doesn't make it untrue. Rise in temperature is one indication, retreat of glaciers in another, rise in sea level yet another, increase in ocean acidity another and the list goes on. Arguing the science of climate change is no different than arguing the truth of human evolution to a religious zealot that tries to confuse that science with Intelligent Design. It's an exercise in futility that I will completely remove myself from at this point. All of the data was presented. It's time to move on.

 

[gene]

Being that Walgreens doesn't ask what side of the political spectrum you are should you buy a douchebag, that mantle can be worn by anybody. Regardless, a claim was made that if the US lowers their emissions by an amount stated by Preident Obama, that the consequence would be a reduction in global temperature by a given amount. Cause and effect, right? Presumably, whoever ran the numbers, did so using an equation based on a climate model. So, where is corresponding rebuttal from from the sundry global warming left leaning segments that disputes that number? Because the way I currently see it it's like you've got this giant pool that holds 1000 people and studies have shown that there's a problem with the water because people are pissing in it. Somehow, the chlorine system is just being overwhelmed by the amount of urine in the water. All the families whose kids use the pool agree. So, the President of the Pool Association removes one child and then claims that as promised, he's done something about it. Those who support the President say he's a man of his word, a man of science, a man of principal, a man of action. So where are the numbers?

The problem is it's not a real news story. I'm not even sure where they pulled those "facts" from. It's very typical of that website which is nothing more than an extension of Fox News.

Even the WSJ (which is a Republican leaning organization) is reporting on Obama's plan to reduce emissions 30% by 2030. And, this is with great opposition by the Republican congress.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/epa-rule-to-cost-up-to-8-8-billion-annually-sources-say-1401710600

 

[Chu Gai]

The problem is it's not a real news story. I'm not even sure where they pulled those "facts" from. It's very typical of that website which is nothing more than an extension of Fox News.

Even the WSJ (which is a Republican leaning organization) is reporting on Obama's plan to reduce emissions 30% by 2030. And, this is with great opposition by the Republican congress.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/epa-rule-to-cost-up-to-8-8-billion-annually-sources-say-1401710600

I don't know how the figure was arrived at, Gene, but generally speaking whenever one side or the other comes out with a point, valid or not, it's usually followed by something like a rebuttal. I don't even know what equation/model was used. If'n I was doing it, I'd look to hold all variables constant except those that had to do with the change I was implementing. Unfortunately, that would also imply not accounting for population growth and its incremental positive contribution.

 

[Chu Gai]

 

[gene]

I don't know how the figure was arrived at, Gene, but generally speaking whenever one side or the other comes out with a point, valid or not, it's usually followed by something like a rebuttal. I don't even know what equation/model was used. If'n I was doing it, I'd look to hold all variables constant except those that had to do with the change I was implementing. Unfortunately, that would also imply not accounting for population growth and its incremental positive contribution.

Either way, we are doomed my friend. Our grand kids are going to be living in a world much different than ours but hopefully by then we will have cities in the skies like the Jetsons

 

[markw]

Either way, we are doomed my friend. Our grand kids are going to be living in a world much different than ours but hopefully by then we will have cities in the skies like the Jetsons

Totally agree, but I thought you didn't want to make this a political thread.

 

[KEW]

No but I'm not sure what makes a cardiologist qualified with gastrointestinal stuff. From my POV, he's an opportunist and found a way to make substantially more money than in his field just like Dr. Oz and several others. His diet program doesn't seem to be working for him, though.

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/115359242

Dr. Davis is the rare modern doctor who pays attention to his patients and doesn't blindly follow the insurance protocals for treatment.
I have followed his blog long before he wrote Wheat Belly.
I wish you would actually read some of his work before discounting it.
As a cardiologist, he followed the cardiology related path of increases in obesity and diabetes, trying to explain why our generations are having such high rates.
If you look at the changes to wheat from the 60s & 70s, one change is a increasing of the number of chromosomes in wheat from 14 to 42. Much of this was done by a brilliant man who was striving to ease world hunger. Unfortunately, this work predates good knowledge of genetics. If you believe tripling chromosomes doesn't matter, that is your prerogative, but you will also see gluten levels are much higher in this wheat.look at timelines for obesity, Celiacs, and diabetes.
This wheat is incredible high yield. So much so, that if you want gov farm subsidies this is the wheat you must grow. How much old wheat do think is grown in the U.S.?

 

[Chu Gai]

Either way, we are doomed my friend. Our grand kids are going to be living in a world much different than ours but hopefully by then we will have cities in the skies like the Jetsons

Well, we all live in different worlds than our parents but I understand the sentiment. I grew up in NH and while in HS belonged to the German Club. This was nothing more than excuse for us to look towards doing some hiking on Appalachian trails with the goal of knocking off the 4000 footers. Appreciate nature if you will. Back then you could drink from any stream without cautionary signs and the water was damned fine. And the stars, Gene, nothing like it.

And maybe not the Jetsons but Elysium.

 

[Chu Gai]

Dr. Davis is the rare modern doctor who pays attention to his patients and doesn't blindly follow the insurance protocals for treatment.
I have followed his blog long before he wrote Wheat Belly.
I wish you would actually read some of his work before discounting it.
As a cardiologist, he followed the cardiology related path of increases in obesity and diabetes, trying to explain why our generations are having such high rates.
If you look at the changes to wheat from the 60s & 70s, one change is a increasing of the number of chromosomes in wheat from 14 to 42. Much of this was done by a brilliant man who was striving to ease world hunger. Unfortunately, this work predates good knowledge of genetics. If you believe tripling chromosomes doesn't matter, that is your prerogative, but you will also see gluten levels are much higher in this wheat.look at timelines for obesity, Celiacs, and diabetes.
This wheat is incredible high yield. So much so, that if you want gov farm subsidies this is the wheat you must grow. How much old wheat do think is grown in the U.S.?

If he's a proponent and a practioner, why is he now substantially overweight?