OK, NOW I understand. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[MtGun44]

CBS has announced that Global WARMING is causing all this cold weather,
snow in 49 states, the Great Lakes frozen over, etc.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/02/13/Horrible-Winter-CBS-Says-Blame-Global-Warming

I am sure glad that they got that all figured out, I had gotten confused and was thinking
that it was being caused by COLDER weather. :kidding:

Bill

[s mac]

CBS has announced that Global WARMING is causing all this cold weather,
snow in 49 states, the Great Lakes frozen over, etc.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/02/13/Horrible-Winter-CBS-Says-Blame-Global-Warming

I am sure glad that they got that all figured out, I had gotten confused and was thinking
that it was being caused by COLDER weather. :kidding:

Bill
Some things are best left to the exspurts.

[Garyshome]

God's wrath on a Godless country!

[ShooterAZ]

Well unfortunately out west where I am, we aren't getting much precip or cold for that matter. Here in Flagstaff we average over 100 inches of snow. So far this season only a trace. 66 degrees for the high today, sure to set a record. I wish all you guys in the South & East would quit stealing all of our snow & ice. I can hear the bark beetles out there munching all the pine trees. Hopefully we will get some rain & snow soon, or you guys will be reading about us burning down later this summer.

[bhn22]

Global Warming is causing the next ice age. Makes sense to me!

[Bullshop]

"""Some things are best left to the exspurts."""
To better understand our language and word meaning I like to break down words into their component parts. Many words in our language are combinations of other words combined to give another meaning that can be a blend of the meaning of the component parts. So lets look at ex- sperts.
Ex --- previously, has been,
spert --- the last drops of urination
exspert --- one that has been the fulfillment of urination
Don't we have a wonderful language!

[Freightman]

We are going to be 80 tomorrow and Sunday, no rain /snow/fog/ ect. going to give a whole new meaning to "Burn Baby Burn" this spring.

[runfiverun]

it's been business as usual this year as far as the weather goes around here.
maybe the cold has been a little colder and the warm has been a little warmer [shrug]
but we are still getting snow and ice during the winter, mud in the spring, and occasional sunshine in the late summer.

[quilbilly]

The difference between an exspurt and a professional is that if an exspurt is wrong, he keeps his job and gets pay raises on time. A professional isn't required to be politically correct and loses his job and income if he is wrong.

[shdwlkr]

Shucks if this global warming keeps us we may see much of the west dry up and blow away. The East coast will be buried under ice and snow and the south will see four seasons.

I am sure glad that Al Gore and his bunch figured out the problem. But I wonder if we get all the Liberal, Socialist, Communists in America to just keep their lying mouths shut for a couple of years if the weather will improve?

As was said earlier I wonder if The Lord is trying to tell us something. We were once a God fearing Nation now it seems everyone is out for what's in it for me. Never been that way so don't know how to be that kind of person, hope I never learn. I have to many friends that I enjoy chatting with.

[geargnasher]

I wonder what the weather is like in the middle east, and if Allah adjusts according to the behavior of the people? Perhaps CBS will know...

Gear

[9w1911]

its really warm and a large drought in the Sierra Nevada so,,,

[montana_charlie]

Some things are best left to the exspurts.
http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/weather_zps16128fd8.jpg

[mold maker]

Since there is nothing that we can do to the weather, except talk about it, We sure got it covered.
It is what it is.

[crowbuster]

We just got two more inches of global warming. Yip, clear as mud.

[starmac]

You guys in the south are lucky this was explained so well. It will save you some money on air conditioning bills this summer, if you will just install a woodstove and use it, instead of the air conditioner.

[leftiye]

I wonder what the weather is like in the middle east, and if Allah adjusts according to the behavior of the people? Perhaps CBS will know...Gear

You mean like raining turds?

[geargnasher]

I live in Texas, so I have about six tons worth of AC capacity, a dozen or more fans, an iron stove, and a variety of portable heaters. Three days in the "spring" and two days in the "fall" we don't use one or the other, just open the windows.

Gear

[Socal147]

Hope This Helps - Clear Up The Confusion.

Global Warming was an incorrect term propagated by the media.
Climate Change is the correct scientific term.
Climate Change occurs on an annual basis and varies by geographic location.

Have A Good Day!

[s mac]

Hope This Helps - Clear Up The Confusion.

Global Warming was an incorrect term propagated by the media.
Climate Change is the correct scientific term.
Climate Change occurs on an annual basis and varies by geographic location.

Have A Good Day!

I don't think we are the confused.

[9w1911]

Climate change is correct, and the redistribution of regional climate is also changing, like Aspen Co is now a desert and its 50 degrees here in the Sierra at 6000ft in Feb, has never been this warm since 1514 and because its all cold and snowy where you are has no bearing on climate change, its actually a very narrow way to look at the issue.

[wallenba]

Stranger things happen...

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/hot_water.html

[pretzelxx]

All I can say is, I miss the snow. Out in the supposed great pacific north west all we have is rain. I miss the knee deep snow and blistering cold...

[starmac]

has never been this warm since 1514 and because its all cold and snowy where you are has no bearing on climate change, its actually a very narrow way to look at the issue.

I have to ask, who was the weatherman in 1514. lol

Everywhere I have ever been, climate change has occurred in days, even hours, and I have to think it has since someone invented the universe. The climate changes everyday to some extent, and always has.

[Black Powder Bill]

I live 7 miles south of Lake Ontario and have been waiting for all that ice to melt & wash this house away so I can collect the insurance money. Then I'll buy me a big ol' house boat and float down to Georgia.

[Black Powder Bill]

has never been this warm since 1514 and because its all cold and snowy where you are has no bearing on climate change, its actually a very narrow way to look at the issue.

I have to ask, who was the weatherman in 1514. lol

Everywhere I have ever been, climate change has occurred in days, even hours, and I have to think it has since someone invented the universe. The climate changes everyday to some extent, and always has.

They still had fools thought the earth was flat. The pope had everything locked up from gold to education. But the heathen Incas had pictures that followed all of this.

All I know is around the end of October I need to take the mower deck off, clean it up and get the plow on. It's been that way for 3 decades now.

[Socal147]

All because of the dam climate change. Dam!

[wv109323]

It's all scientific : Ice Age, 50,000 years of Global Warming then 50,000 years and another Ice Age.

[TXGunNut]

Last couple of weeks we've had single digits/teens and 70's... in the same week. Sure wish Al Gore would keep his global warming off my back porch, darn near busted my **** more than a few times this year. Quite often we go a whole winter with no snow or ice, not lately tho. Gloal warming indeed.

[leeggen]

Obama said it is Bush's fault. All the cold and snow from Texas ( hell freezing over ) is the problem. Sometimes it pays to just hang around in the middle and not get hit with much of nothing.
CD in TN

[frkelly74]

As sure as old men sit and talk about the weather,
As sure as old women sit and talk about old men,
I'm gonna love you forever, forever and ever Amen.
.....

[Blacksmith]

The day before they predicted 3" to 5" we got 14" and I am going to trust what they predict will happen in 100 years. Not likely.

We didn't have all this crazy weather when Bush was in the White House.

[cbrick]

A couple of weeks ago the neighbor was complaining about the polar vortex.

I asked her, is that what you call it? She said sure, what do you call it?

I said . . . Winter, it's January.

Rick

[truthisdiscovered]

The climate change crisis is a fabrication dreamed up by those who wish to "fundamentally change the United States of America".

It begins with an idea to use pour scientific analysis to alarm the masses into compliance with draconian measures to cut greenhouse emissions.

Of course the by-product of these measures is the end of private energy companies especially those who primarily use fossil fuels.

"Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket..."

Remember that when you are trying to help your aging parents to pay their light bill.

Truth

[Hickok]

God's wrath on a Godless country!We have taken God out everything in this country, in His absence someone else has moved in!

[Black Powder Bill]

A couple of weeks ago the neighbor was complaining about the polar vortex.

I asked her, is that what you call it? She said sure, what do you call it?

I said . . . Winter, it's January.

Rick

Polar Vortex, I good friend of mine has a high school classmate who is a Real weatherman ...He is still looking for the polar vortex the news keeps talking about.

I am amused at how every fart in the wind has a personal name now days.

[cbrick]

Polar Vortex, I good friend of mine has a high school classmate who is a Real weatherman ...He is still looking for the polar vortex the news keeps talking about.

I am amused at how every fart in the wind has a personal name now days.

Polar vortex is nothing more than another terminology/method the libtards use to perpetuate the global cooling, oops, global warming, oops I mean climate change political agenda.

A personal name for every fart in the wind is yet another method used to bring it home, make it personal that your killing the planet. You! Personally, your lifestyle is killing us all.

I lived in SoCal for years (far too many years) and if you went outside and a light rain was falling, nothing much, just a light rain with no wind or anything if you went inside & turned on the TV all you heard was . . . Storm watch, news at 10.

All of it is designed to make everything sound devastating to all of those that are incapable of a thought of their own. For those that are capable of thinking it through the libtards know they will never get them on board, the intent is to overwhelm them with numbers of those who cannot think it out. What a pity it's working.

Rick

[frkelly74]

Personally I thing all the hype is just to get ratings. " Sit still and watch folks, We will tell you what to think, but not till 11:00. "

[dtknowles]

I wonder what the weather is like in the middle east, and if Allah adjusts according to the behavior of the people? Perhaps CBS will know...

Gear

Allah's wrath on the Middle East is reaching a crescendo, Israel is still doing well and have what for them must seem like a peaceful decade. The rest of the population of the Middle East has started learning about and demanding democracy. Powerful Muslim leaders are have been deposed. Many more Muslims are dying violent deaths at the hands off Muslims. If Allah is sending them a sign it would be "you are on the wrong path." The rest of the world is finding more oil and gas so OPEC is getting weak.

Christ's Father's message to the faithful in the Christian world is much milder and harder to understand. Christian values are being ignored with hedonism at what might be a two century or greater high. The severe weather could be interpreted not as punishment for bad behavior but a warning to take better care of the planet he put in our care, it is hard to say. The success of the rich and banks even as the economy struggled with only a few cheaters punished, what is Christ's Father's message there.

I understand Allah is a brutal god and the Holy Trinity is a gentle god but the godless communists seem to be prospering. Do you think your God is interventionist or mostly just an observer.

Tim

[lars1367]

Sure does make sense, if you don't think about it.

[Down South]

More snow, ice and freezing temps at my house in Louisiana than I've seen since I was a kid, long time ago. I've been staying in Houston four yrs now. Worst winter here in the last four yrs.

[Handloader109]

The climate change crisis is a fabrication dreamed up by those who wish to "fundamentally change the United States of America".

It begins with an idea to use pour scientific analysis to alarm the masses into compliance with draconian measures to cut greenhouse emissions.

Of course the by-product of these measures is the end of private energy companies especially those who primarily use fossil fuels.

"Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket..."

Remember that when you are trying to help your aging parents to pay their light bill.

Truth

Yep, its ALL about the money. OUR money btw, not the politicians. Add a Carbon TAX and make EVERYTHING go up by a LARGE% all in the name of 'saving' us from either freezing to death or burning up.. What a crock! Man is to the earth, but a gnat on an elephant's butt.

[Beau Cassidy]

And to think I thought global warming was the result of it getting warm and global cooling as the result of it getting cool.

[Lead Fred]

Global warming was invented to fiance the global governance.

So it can be hot of cold, just pay for your carbon credits and turn in your guns

[Lefty Red]

I guess its better to blame the godless and its judgement from a deity then to actually admit we as a species have really caused this.
Makes sense, or make you feel better.

Lefty

[MtGun44]

Thinking that mankind's 0.4% input of a trace gas is somehow triggering massive change
because that 0.4% is somehow more critical than the 99.6% of natural CO2 put into the air
each year by volcanoes and such takes a special kind of Al Gore-Kalifornia
thinking.

Believing the climate computer models takes a real lack of understanding of
what a "computer model" is and can and CANNOT do. Having written computer models
at a very high level for some of the biggest computer systems that exist for about 40 years
for a living, I laugh my butt off when some fool says he has a computer model that will
predict the climate in 50 or 100 years.

There are two possibilities for the "scientists" who say that they have these computer models
that will predict the climate in 100 years. Either they actually believe it, and are a fool or they
know it is BS and they are a charlatan and a liar. You choose - fool or charlatan/liar. Either
way - keep these folks away from the levers of power.

Bill

[oneokie]

Either thay actually believe it, and are a fool or they
know it is BS and they are a charlatan and a liar. You choose - fool or charlatan/liar. Either
way - keep these folks away from the levers of power.

Bill

Old saying, "Dazzle them with brilliance or baffle them with BS".

[Lefty Red]

Or you can actually look at real data and have someone besides FAX NEWS explain it to you. But I will leave you in your faith. Shouldn't have shaken the tree. Go back to sleep......

[BeeMan]

But I wonder if we get all the Liberal, Socialist, Communists in America to just keep their lying mouths shut for a couple of years if the weather will improve?



That would fix a lot more than just the weather.

[10x]

Global Warming is causing the next ice age. Makes sense to me!

In reality global warming may well be part of the ice age cycle.
Warm air holds more water, heating the air at the equator moves that water to to the poles where it falls as snow or ice.
The reason it falls as snow or ice is that it is colder at the poles. Heat from the sun is reflected (albedo) from the cloud cover (wet air) at the poles. Heat from that wet air is radiated at the poles (82 calories of heat, more than 50% radiated into space - will form ice in the upper atmosphere). The ice and snow that fall to earth take 82 calories of heat per gram to melt - that heat is being reflected into space rather than being absorbed by the atmosphere at the poles. The result is a build up of ice (glaciers) at the poles. The warmer the air, the more water gets shunted to the poles, freezes, and falls.
During the wisconsin glaciation (ended about 12,000 years ago in most of N. America, the sea levels were apparently some 180 meters lower than today. Something provided the heat energy to move all that water to to the poles to create the glaciers and cause the rapid glacial advances claimed by some geologists.

Latent heat of fusion (83 calories per gram needed to melt 1 gram of ice at -1C) is not part of any global warming model. The folks who built the global warming models neglected the chemistry and physics of water.

Bottom line, an ice age (glaciation) is one possible result of global warming.
That being said, the permafrost found in Northern Canada seems to be only 4 - 5000 years old (from radio carbon of organics found in the perma frost).
And the oldest ice in the ice pack (not an ice cap) on the Arctic ocean is only about 4000 years old.

The global warming crowd do use the issue to get research grants - the money flows in.

The worlds climate is dynamic, - it changes - either we learn to cope with the changes or we suffer.

The next Global warming conference should be held in Yellowknife, NWT, Canada in the month of January. -40c should open up the eyes of many of the global warming folk and adjust some attitudes.

[cbrick]

I guess its better to blame the godless and its judgement from a deity then to actually admit we as a species have really caused this. Lefty

Caused what? Global cooling? Oops no, that's global warming. Oopsie again, oh well maybe it's climate change. Yeah, yeah, that's it, it's climate change.

The only thing a computer model can put out is what was programed into it making it extremely easy to get the results the programmer wants.


Thinking that mankind's 0.4% input of a trace gas is somehow triggering massive change because that 0.4% is somehow more critical than the 99.6% of natural CO2 put into the air each year by volcanoes and such takes a special kind of Al Gore-Kalifornia thinking. Bill

A Steven King size imagination doesn't hurt either. [smilie=1:

Rick

[Blacksmith]

Look at the computer models of hurricanes and how much they differ (none are repeatedly accurate). It must be much easier to get a grant to create a new computer model than get a grant to make an existing computer model accurate.

[JeffinNZ]

God's wrath on a Godless country!

There's even LESS evidence of that.

[USAFrox]

Hey Lefty Red, here's some science for you:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html?m=1

1350+ peer-reviewed scientific articles SUPPORTING the "skeptic" view of the global warming nonsense. To steal a page from the global warming alarmists, "the science is settled", and "there's a consensus" that global warming is a hoax.

[GaryN]

They can't even tell you what is going to happen in two weeks. How would they ever be able to tell you what is going to happen in decades? One big problem that a lot of the climate change B.S. doesn't address is the affects of the sun. They never know what the sun is going to do. And since that is where the heat comes from..........

[bob208]

the only reason we have global warming . is the scientists with the government grants do not want to lose out on the government gravy train and have to get a real job.

[starmac]

the only reason we have global warming . is the scientists with the government grants do not want to lose out on the government gravy train and have to get a real job.

It's bucks, BEEG BUCKS, The scientist are just doing what they are told.

[JeffinNZ]

It's all a very convenient way of extracting more tax out of us all.

[geargnasher]

There's even LESS evidence of that.

I searched a bit to see if anyone has done any scientific studies or written code to sort out a weather model based on the different climatic jurisdictions of various deities, but didn't find much except a lot of commentary about the last global flood, which was said to be caused by too much rain, not the polar caps melting.

Gear

[btroj]

I saw a meteorologist the other day comment on the fact he predicted this winters pattern in weather because it mirrors a period in the 50s or so. He said he looked at water temps in the pacific and knew that this is what happened last time those temps occurred. This tells me that this year isn't really unusual at all, just part of a pattern.

I would trust the science more if it wasn't all part of an agenda. I don't like scientific bias too much and I hate agenda based science even more.

[Nrut]

God's wrath on a Godless country!
If that is the case then why no knee deep snow and sub zero temps in Saudi Arabia and other "godless" countries??

[starmac]

Them folks would probably love some cooler weather and snow too. It would be nice to be able to ride a snow machine once in a while, instead of a camel. lol

[Hickory]

Global warming was invented to fiance the global governance.

So it can be hot of cold, just pay for your carbon credits and turn in your guns

And you don't have to be a genius to figure this out.

[Lefty Red]

Hey Lefty Red, here's some science for you:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html?m=1

1350+ peer-reviewed scientific articles SUPPORTING the "skeptic" view of the global warming nonsense. To steal a page from the global warming alarmists, "the science is settled", and "there's a consensus" that global warming is a hoax.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/may/16/climate-change-scienceofclimatechange

http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/08/why-climate-deniers-have-no-scientific-credibility-only-1-9136-study-authors-rejects-global-warming

http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/08/why-climate-deniers-have-no-scientific-credibility-only-1-9136-study-authors-rejects-global-warming

[TXGunNut]

Give me enough numbers and I can prove anything. Seems our gubbermint scientists are pretty good with numbers too.

[MtGun44]

Science is not a democracy. The truth is the truth, and it does not care how many
people believe in it. Galileo was nearly the only scientist that was saying that the earth
orbited the sun, and was forced to recant. Didn't change the fact that the earth orbits
the sun. The fact that a bunch of third rate losers that got a science degree are willing
to prostitute themselves for money, power and recognition shouldn't surprise anyone.
The fact that they are believed by so many uncritical-thinking lemmings even after
15 years with no significant warming is the biggest surprise.

The hard fact is that the computer models are garbage. They cannot start at some earlier time
and get from that KNOWN climate pattern to our current KNOWN climate pattern. They do NOT
predict the current 15 year "pause" in global warming. Why? Because they are BS. They
cannot predict the Little Ice Age, which fools like Mann are desperately trying to "prove"
never happened, regardless of the huge body of eyewitness reports of the climate in that
period.

I make computer models for a living and there are a lot of ways to get it wrong and only
one way to get it right. A useful computer model requires a lot of lab testing and validation to
be accurate. The "lab testing" is impossible for climate modeling - let's hold the Pacific
Ocean temperature, salinity, plankton count, iron content and oxygen content constant for
a year while we vary the cloud cover in 5% increments from 0 to 100% . . . . . OOPS,
can't do it, or any of the other 1000s of 'calibration runs' that are REQUIRED to calculate
the coefficients of the variables, which is mandatory to make a valid computer model.

Climate models are BS now, and are likely to remain BS for the foreseeable future. Even
with the biggest supercomputers available, the global atmosphere is divided into elements
that are many tens to hundreds of miles on a side and the weather is constant over this subvolume.
This extremely coarse discretization is a serious problem, in addition to the fundamentally
uncalibrated nature of the models. They are low grade bull####.

They cannot tell you if it will rain in 4 days with any consistency, why would anyone
believe that they can tell you what the climate will be in 100 years?

Bill

[USAFrox]

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/may/16/climate-change-scienceofclimatechange

http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/08/why-climate-deniers-have-no-scientific-credibility-only-1-9136-study-authors-rejects-global-warming

http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/08/why-climate-deniers-have-no-scientific-credibility-only-1-9136-study-authors-rejects-global-warming

Did you notice that the "97% consensus" links you posted we're from 2004? People are waking up, now that it has been 17+ years of no warming. Try looking at RECENT science.

[Nrut]

http://notrickszone.com/2014/02/08/another-failed-outlook-noaancep-totally-botch-2013-2014-winter-outlooks-for-usa-and-europe-exact-opposite-occurs/#sthash.BJ3HMSvA.w9jzziL5.dpuf

Y2Kyoto: Cold Enough For Ya?
Because accuracy improves as distance from the target increases:

If you think it just couldn't be possible for any weather outfit to perform as poorly as the UK's Met Office in long-term outlooks (13 out of 14 wrong), think again. It appears the US national weather services are right on their heels when it comes to who can make the all-time least accurate outlooks.

And we're supposed to believe these people when it comes to their climate forecasting?

By Kate on February 9, 2014 7:45 AM | Permalink

96979

[MtGun44]

Interesting article by a climate scientist, excellent, clear discussion of the con game
that is AGW "science", by an actual scientist.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/climate_consensus_con_game.html

Bill

[blackthorn]

Quote "This extremely coarse discretization is a serious problem, in addition to the fundamentally-" MtGun44---- What is the meaning of "discretization"???? I seriously wish you guys would quit doing your drinking in the library!! LOL!

[geargnasher]

You ought to see some of the words in the extreme lube thread....

Gear

[USAFrox]

Check out this very short video that exposes the fraud of "global warming".

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uif1NwcUgMU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUif1NwcUgMU

[MtGun44]

To model three dimensional spaces, you divide the space into smaller pieces. This process of dividing an object (solid, or air, like our atmosphere) into discrete subvolumes is 'discretization'. If you have very small subvolumes, then the simplifying assumption that the conditions in one subvolume are the same throughout that subvolume is pretty close to true. Small subvolumes is "fine discretization" and large subvolumes is "coarse discretization". Fine is more accurate, but completely impractical.

If we divide the global atmosphere into smaller pieces (subvolumes), and then calculate what is happening in each piece - we must assume that the temperature, pressure, humidity, trace gas content, dust content, wind speed, wind direction, sun angle, cloud cover percentage, dust reflectivity, dust particle size, etc, etc, etc, etc are THE SAME ALL THROUGH THAT SUBVOLUME.
If you choose your subvolume (element) size to be small, this assumption can be fairly close to true. The volume of the atmosphere is about 4.2 billion cubic kilometers, which is 4.2 billion billion cubic meters. In scientific notation, this is 4.2 E+18 cubic meters. If you had a computational system set up to compute what you needed to do for each cubic meter in one microsecond (one millionth of a second), it would take 4.2 billion seconds to get one set of calculations done. This is about 133 years, so this number of elements is not practical. We will have to use larger volumes to get the computational times down.

So, it is not practical to use subvolumes for calculation that are 1 cubic meter in size. From what I have read, the typical atmospheric model has elements (subvolumes for calculation) which are many tens to even hundreds of miles across - so that the biggest supercomputers available can get SOME SORT of a solution in a reasonable time. Clearly, the assumption of no variation of conditions across a volume this large are total baloney. Even with a complex element formulation which allows some variation, the allowable variations will have to be reasonable, such as a continuous, smooth linear variation across the element. This still cannot match the reality that you know - temperature varies significantly on a scale of 1 mile or much less, and do not vary in a uniform way.

It is too complex to explain in detail, but the reality is that the limits of the computers is serious, but FAR
more important is that the scientists CANNOT write equations that accurately calculate the variation effects
caused by changes in gases or cloud cover. This information is simply not known and the experiments to
test equations that are 'guesstimated" CANNOT BE DONE. We cannot force the cloud cover to change in
small increments while holding humidity, sun angle, surface temperature, wind speed and direction, etc, etc
CONSTANT so that the unique effect of cloud cover can be measured experimentally. ALL the variables
are all mixed up and the way that they interact is essentially impossible to accurately separate out.

Climate models are BS.

Bill

[Echo]

97035Dead of Winter here...

[Petrol & Powder]

I’m a bit reluctant to join this fray but here goes:

The concept that CO2 in the atmosphere traps heat isn’t new; in fact it’s well understood as a factor in the ending of an ice age. The concept that human activity is altering the climate is new. That theory is based on the premise that by releasing carbon that is stored in fossil fuels we are speeding up the release of carbon into the atmosphere and therefore altering the climate.

I’m not certain that human activity is altering the climate, but for the sake of argument, I’ll go with that for the moment.
There are about 7 billion people on the planet. Crippling the economy of the 313 million people that live in the U.S.A. is not a solution to this alleged problem that I can support.
Yes, the U.S. is very industrialized and we consume a lot of the world’s energy, but we are not the only consumers of fossil fuels in the world. The idea that the U.S. should willingly destroy its own economy in order to set an example for the rest of the world is the economic equivalent of unilateral disarmament. I seriously doubt that if we place colossal burdens on our country so that we can, “do our part to save the earth”; that other nations will follow our example and do the same.
A common axiom of ALL foreign affairs is that nations act in their own best interest. If we severely limit our use of fossil fuels, I don’t believe China, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Russia, Eastern Europe, Central America and others are going to follow suit because they think “It’s just the right thing to do”. Nor are they going to say, “Look, America is doing it, we should join them and help save the planet”. That type of liberal idealistic thinking is exactly the kind of “Kumbaya” thought processes that lead to the policies of appeasement towards Hitler. It sounds good to all of the libtards sitting on the floor in a drum circle with their tie-dyed hemp tee shirts & sandals, but it’s stupid and damaging to the rest of us.
That brings us to the question of why?
I don’t believe it’s about saving the planet, I THINK IT IS NOTHING MORE THAN A HUGE POWER GRAB !
Liberals believe that it is unfair that the U.S.A. has so much and other people of the world have so little (sound familiar?). The only way they can correct that perceived inequity is to guise it as a scientific necessity. The science community is happy to play along because it gives them status. The masses are happy to go along because they are:
A. Lemmings-
and
B. too stupid, insecure and lazy to question anything.
The third world and emerging powers are happy to play along because it potentially improves their position.

Then we reach the war of language. First the liberal do-gooders attempted to sell the plan as Global Warming. That failed for obvious reasons and they were forced to re-brand it as Climate Change.
Using the label of Climate Change was brilliant. No matter what actually occurs, you can’t disprove it. If it gets warmer, it’s Climate Change. If it gets colder, it’s Climate Change. If it gets wetter, it’s Climate Change…..you get the point. That was a brilliant piece of mass marketing. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.
Then the Pièce de résistance was the creation of the derogatory label of, “Climate Change Denier”.
If you dare question the facts, science, sources, data, motive or worst of all – integrity; of any part of the scheme, you are immediately labeled a Denier. Remember that part about people being Lemmings; most people don’t want to stand apart from the crowd. Attaching the “denier” label to anyone that dares question the authority makes that activity unpopular. Real science doesn’t fear scrutiny.

[MtGun44]

"Real science doesn't fear scrutiny."

Yes, excellent point. (all of it!)

Bill

[cbrick]

First the liberal do-gooders attempted to sell the plan as Global Warming. That failed for obvious reasons and they were forced to re-brand it as Climate Change.

Actually for many years it was called global cooling, when that failed magically over night it became Global warming. When that failed miserably they said . . . oopsie, we got it wrong, you see it's actually climate change.

The brand new name, deniers, is extremely true to form for libtards and is exactly what they do with every issue. When you have no leg to stand on simply invent a name to degrade and insult. But that fails miserably too because what they don't understand is that it is only an insulting name to them.

So what is the definition of denier? Someone that can think for themselves and see what is going on, someone that doesn't drink the Kool-Aid.

I will happily wear the name denier, it's not an insult as it's intended to be, it's a badge of honor.

Rick

[Petrol & Powder]

Rick - 1. Well said.
2. I actually remember when "Global Cooling" was being sold
3. If you refuse to drink the Kool-Aid & you can think for yourself, the liberals will not spend time trying to convert you, they have plenty of easier targets.

I too wear the label as a badge of honor.

[USAFrox]

Here's another excellent article that I challenge any global warming believer to read and then intelligently try and refute.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/climate_consensus_con_game.html?utm_source=twitter feed&utm_medium=facebook#

[MtGun44]

USAFrox - check post #69

Bill

[USAFrox]

USAFrox - check post #69

Bill


Oops, sorry, Bill. You know what they say - great minds think alike - and ours do too! :grin:

[GaryN]

Rick - 1. Well said.
2. I actually remember when "Global Cooling" was being sold
3. If you refuse to drink the Kool-Aid & you can think for yourself, the liberals will not spend time trying to convert you, they have plenty of easier targets.

I too wear the label as a badge of honor.

I also remember when global cooling was being sold. There were several articles about how North America was going to become a giant glacier. IIRC it was in the 70's. That's not very long ago to completely change your point of view from a scientific standpoint.

[MtGun44]

". . . . . from a scientific standpoint" IMO, more from a political and financial gain standpoint.

USAFrox - yep, no problem.

Bill

[quilbilly]

Speaking just for myself, as an old, broke down fish biologist with degrees in marine invertebrates, I prefer to watch what the fish and plankton are doing in the North Pacific, the largest heat capturer in the northern hemisphere. I use what I see to plan for my business and help my customers plan theirs and ignore the so-called experts. Since 1999, the plankton diversity in the northeast Pacific northy of the Ore/Cal border has shifted from temperate to subarctic species dominating. Pink salmon, a sub-arctic salmon have expanded their range 200 miles south and produced seven record year returns causing my and my customers businesses to grow (Wooo!! Hooo!!). Neither of these could happen if there was any global warming since 1999 whatsoever. Data from hundreds of years has shown that climate trends in the Antarctic precede weather trends in the Northern Hemisphere by about 8 years and for the last three years the Antarctic ice pack has expanded farther north than at least since at least the last couple hundred years. Lack of sunspots also seem to lead to colder climate trends (last summer was the weakest solar minima recorded). The bottom line is that my and my customer's business's will continue to prosper for another eight more years if the State of Washington's salmon managers don't successfully screw up the resource again.
When I talk with the GW true believers, I just say that I have a choice whether to believe the plankton and the salmon or I can believe John Kerry and AlGore.

[w0fms]

Well, for those who miss snow, you can imagine telling your 12 year old son who is helping you shovel out 300' of 6" of slush that is clogging up the snow blower and is faster to do with two shovels that the only place in Arizona, where he wants to move where it snows is Flagstaff.. and then you read people wanting the white $$$$ and telling me that I lied to my kid last night because it isn't snowing in Flagstaff... sigh.. that's about right in this Obama world, isn't it?

I can't stand it. Texas, Arizona or Florida.. it will happen as soon as the economy turns around enough to find a decent engineering job down there... ;)

[starmac]

It is funny, I ran into a guy from Florida yesterday that works summers up here. I had to stop and ask why he was back, as his type of work will not even think about starting for a couple more months. He said he was burning up down there (where he actually lives) and was bored too, so here he is. lol

[jaystuw]

Clever thread. packaged as about global warming so it fits in "our town". But really, to a large degree, a general political attack on the left. All the usual hard right leaners are posting the usual "libertard" stuff, no surprises here. business as usual.

Really, for me, the only question is, Do I jump in? And if I do, how hard? The question answers Itself; if I get involved, its going to be a full on brawl! Do I risk It? How far can I go before incurring the wrath of goodsteel? I have been there and know exactly what that is all about, No fun! Its also no fun to be a liberal and not have a clear track to handle my right leaning "pals" in the same rough manner that they themselves dish out.

I must remember, Politics is not why I'm here, I like bullits, classic guns and ideal molds.
I like reading about regular guys with cool, interesting lives. I like the hometown feeling of the place.

So I guess what I am saying is that I have to choose my battles very carefully and not forget the real reason I am here. But Please, vocal righty guys, do not think for a single second that I do not want to engage you in heated debate. I would in fact like that very much. I hate that I must hold back. But remember righty guys, times change. cast boolits Continues to grow. Growth brings a wider range of members that, perhaps, will bring a different view of the world to the table. Push will come to shove. Welcome to the future. Jay

[USAFrox]

Clever thread. packaged as about global warming so it fits in "our town". But really, to a large degree, a general political attack on the left. All the usual hard right leaners are posting the usual "libertard" stuff, no surprises here. business as usual.

Really, for me, the only question is, Do I jump in? And if I do, how hard? The question answers Itself; if I get involved, its going to be a full on brawl! Do I risk It? How far can I go before incurring the wrath of goodsteel? I have been there and know exactly what that is all about, No fun! Its also no fun to be a liberal and not have a clear track to handle my right leaning "pals" in the same rough manner that they themselves dish out.

I must remember, Politics is not why I'm here, I like bullits, classic guns and ideal molds.
I like reading about regular guys with cool, interesting lives. I like the hometown feeling of the place.

So I guess what I am saying is that I have to choose my battles very carefully and not forget the real reason I am here. But Please, vocal righty guys, do not think for a single second that I do not want to engage you in heated debate. I would in fact like that very much. I hate that I must hold back. But remember righty guys, times change. cast boolits Continues to grow. Growth brings a wider range of members with perhaps a different view of the world to the table. Push will come to shove. Welcome to the future. Jay

So, Jay - Did you have anything to add about the actual topic of "Global Warming"? Or just complaining about us "righty guys"?

[Bullshop]

isn't there a place here to have it out no hold barred? The pit? Have at it. Should be interesting! Might even learn something!

[MBTcustom]

Just think of me as a harmless owl asleep on a limb.
Where's all this squeaking coming from?

[GaryN]

Just think of me as a harmless owl asleep on a limb.
Where's all this squeaking coming from?

Hahahaha, I like that.

[jaystuw]

Yes goodsteel, I am perfectly aware that you are watching and waiting.



No, I have nothing to add to the thread other than defending against the hits on the left over global warming. But the harmless owl that's not really so harmless is watching. My hands are tied.



The pit is not no holds barred. You cannot "have at it". bret just got banned for having at it.

Jay

[Blacksmith]

When I talk with the GW true believers, I just say that I have a choice whether to believe the plankton and the salmon or I can believe John Kerry and AlGore.

The plankton and salmon have higher IQ's.

[jaystuw]

Oh, and one other thing. I have no reason to complain about the rightys. They say what they feel is right. My complaint is that I want to cross swords with them and say what I think is right, but can not! Jay

[Petrol & Powder]

Clever thread. packaged as about global warming so it fits in "our town". But really, to a large degree, a general political attack on the left. All the usual hard right leaners are posting the usual "libertard" stuff, no surprises here. business as usual.

Really, for me, the only question is, Do I jump in? And if I do, how hard? The question answers Itself; if I get involved, its going to be a full on brawl! Do I risk It? How far can I go before incurring the wrath of goodsteel? I have been there and know exactly what that is all about, No fun! Its also no fun to be a liberal and not have a clear track to handle my right leaning "pals" in the same rough manner that they themselves dish out.

I must remember, Politics is not why I'm here, I like bullits, classic guns and ideal molds.
I like reading about regular guys with cool, interesting lives. I like the hometown feeling of the place.

So I guess what I am saying is that I have to choose my battles very carefully and not forget the real reason I am here. But Please, vocal righty guys, do not think for a single second that I do not want to engage you in heated debate. I would in fact like that very much. I hate that I must hold back. But remember righty guys, times change. cast boolits Continues to grow. Growth brings a wider range of members with perhaps a different view of the world to the table. Push will come to shove. Welcome to the future. Jay

I buried the phase "libtard"[sic] deep in my post, so at least I know jaystuw read the entire post.

I'm not terribly concerned that great numbers of liberal thinking people are going to be drawn to a forum dedicated to lead firearms projectiles but I would welcome them. I'm fairly confident that if the number of liberal thinking members increases by say 100% (bringing their total number up to maybe........4?) that I will not feel threatened.

And of course, everyone knows that if you adopt a liberal point of view, your IQ goes up and if you reject liberal thinking you MUST be a simpleton So I guess I should abandon logic and just say liberal things, that way everyone around me will think I'm smart.

[USAFrox]

The plankton and salmon have higher IQ's.

Hahaha! Totally agree!

[truthisdiscovered]

I’m a bit reluctant to join this fray but here goes:

The concept that CO2 in the atmosphere traps heat isn’t new; in fact it’s well understood as a factor in the ending of an ice age. The concept that human activity is altering the climate is new. That theory is based on the premise that by releasing carbon that is stored in fossil fuels we are speeding up the release of carbon into the atmosphere and therefore altering the climate.

I’m not certain that human activity is altering the climate, but for the sake of argument, I’ll go with that for the moment.
There are about 7 billion people on the planet. Crippling the economy of the 313 million people that live in the U.S.A. is not a solution to this alleged problem that I can support.
Yes, the U.S. is very industrialized and we consume a lot of the world’s energy, but we are not the only consumers of fossil fuels in the world. The idea that the U.S. should willingly destroy its own economy in order to set an example for the rest of the world is the economic equivalent of unilateral disarmament. I seriously doubt that if we place colossal burdens on our country so that we can, “do our part to save the earth”; that other nations will follow our example and do the same.
A common axiom of ALL foreign affairs is that nations act in their own best interest. If we severely limit our use of fossil fuels, I don’t believe China, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Russia, Eastern Europe, Central America and others are going to follow suit because they think “It’s just the right thing to do”. Nor are they going to say, “Look, America is doing it, we should join them and help save the planet”. That type of liberal idealistic thinking is exactly the kind of “Kumbaya” thought processes that lead to the policies of appeasement towards Hitler. It sounds good to all of the libtards sitting on the floor in a drum circle with their tie-dyed hemp tee shirts & sandals, but it’s stupid and damaging to the rest of us.
That brings us to the question of why?
I don’t believe it’s about saving the planet, I THINK IT IS NOTHING MORE THAN A HUGE POWER GRAB !
Liberals believe that it is unfair that the U.S.A. has so much and other people of the world have so little (sound familiar?). The only way they can correct that perceived inequity is to guise it as a scientific necessity. The science community is happy to play along because it gives them status. The masses are happy to go along because they are:
A. Lemmings-
and
B. too stupid, insecure and lazy to question anything.
The third world and emerging powers are happy to play along because it potentially improves their position.

Then we reach the war of language. First the liberal do-gooders attempted to sell the plan as Global Warming. That failed for obvious reasons and they were forced to re-brand it as Climate Change.
Using the label of Climate Change was brilliant. No matter what actually occurs, you can’t disprove it. If it gets warmer, it’s Climate Change. If it gets colder, it’s Climate Change. If it gets wetter, it’s Climate Change…..you get the point. That was a brilliant piece of mass marketing. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.
Then the Pièce de résistance was the creation of the derogatory label of, “Climate Change Denier”.
If you dare question the facts, science, sources, data, motive or worst of all – integrity; of any part of the scheme, you are immediately labeled a Denier. Remember that part about people being Lemmings; most people don’t want to stand apart from the crowd. Attaching the “denier” label to anyone that dares question the authority makes that activity unpopular. Real science doesn’t fear scrutiny.

What he said...

Nail on the head.

Truth

[jaystuw]

I buried the phase "libtard"[sic] deep in my post, so at least I know jaystuw read the entire post.

I'm not terribly concerned that great numbers of liberal thinking people are going to be drawn to a forum dedicated to lead firearms projectiles but I would welcome them. I'm fairly confident that if the number of liberal thinking members increases by say 100% (bringing their total number up to maybe........4?) that I will not feel threatened.

And of course, everyone knows that if you adopt a liberal point of view, your IQ goes up and if you reject liberal thinking you MUST be a simpleton So I guess I should abandon logic and just say liberal things, that way everyone around me will think I'm smart.

Petrol & powder, Your first paragraph was nice. the second, effective. Your third however, is less than inspired. Not really your best work, agreed? Jay

[Petrol & Powder]

No, I don't agree

[mold maker]

7" of green house gas on everything last week, and it's gonna be 70* with rain today.
The forecasters have been right on the money lately, but I can never figure which clothes to put away. Snow gear or bathing suit??????

[shdwlkr]

I know I am not the smartest turnip in the patch.
but way back when I was in school, yes just after the round wheel was discovered, we learned that the earth is more or less always modifying the climate and has done so as long as man has walked on this earth. It has little to do with humans being here and we can only speed it up or slow it down to some extent.

The pollution we pump into the atmosphere does affect the climate, think China, Russia for two, but what it really is doing to the overall climate of the world is up for debate. Why you may ask well I think we had a world wide eruption called Krakatoa and things really changed. Are we putting that much stuff into the atmosphere right now? We know we have had cooling 8-11 year spans in just my short life time. When I was a kid working on the farm we had wet years, dry years, very cold winters and very hot summers and we also had warm winters where there wasn't much snow and cool summers.

I like to watch the jet stream as it seems to tell you just where the cool or warm air is going to be and this year it has dipped down in the US pretty good. The funny part is for most of winter where I live we didn't get much snow and we depend on that for the water we need in the warmer months. But as we move into spring it has started snowing pretty good in the mountains which may give us some additional water this summer. I have traveled some around this great state and seen a few reservoirs that are pretty much full and others that look like a big mud puddle last summer and into the fall, even looked at a ranch that would have been nice except for one small issue the reservoir that supplies water for the ranch was maybe 3 feet deep when it should have been 30 or more feet deep. I watch the reservoirs here also and between the two things I have watched I have pretty much figured out the weather where I am.

This coming summer I think we are going to be hot and quite dry with water being adequate in some places and in others lacking to a large extent.

Now as to man being able to prove that climate change is bad, threatens our existence, I am still waiting. Al Gore/John Kerry/Obama all crying the sky is falling makes me wonder what they are really doing while everyone is looking up at the sky for answers. Sorry just don't trust the snake oil sales pitch.

[dtknowles]

Climate change, yes it will, is it getting worse, yes for some better for others. Can people make changes that make the climate better, not likely. Are there snake oil salesmen manipulating politicians and the people on climate Change to make a buck, absolutely. Will we run out of fresh water, oil, biodiversity, etc. not likely for a long time. With we lose more species, will fresh water be scarce some places, will the price of oil go up, yes. Can this be stopped, not very likely. Try not to be taken in by the snake oil salesmen but don't ignore the facts either. If the less developed countries continue to modernize and expand they will be competition for these limited resources and things that can be shipped around the globe will face price pressure. They will continue to pollute so any restraint on our part will be overwhelmed by them. Keeping our water clean and not wasting it and developing our petro resources will help us live better.

I may get labeled as part of the new world order for saying what follows but even the enemy has some of the facts right. There are too many people on this planet. It is going to get worse before that gets better, no stopping it and the majority of the population growth is going to happen in the less developed world. I actually believe that the population in the country is mostly sustainable (do you hate that word) but those that think we can grow our economy out of its problems are short sighted but is that a surprise what is the point at being any other kind of sighted.

Tim

[shdwlkr]

So Tim since you feel we have to many people on this planet who do we exterminate and how many so we are at the proper population level? Hilter, Mao, and others have worked on this thought, so are you saying we should also do the same?

The earth has the capacity to handle far more people than are here now if we use resources correctly. Will it happen not in my life time and most likely not in the lifetime of grand kids either. Why simple human greed, there will always be someone that feels they are entitled, don't you just love that word, to have more than they need to life a good life, not a great life but a good life.

Oil, natural gas will we run out of it? Yes it is a finite quantity that will one day be gone. Is it something to panic about? I don't think so as if we really understand that these resources have a limited life and begin to work on better ways to use the sun, water power, coal (yes I said coal) we can have what we need to a very long time.

The facts we have today may not be the truth of tomorrow. I can remember when they said we were running out of oil, yet low and behold the US is sitting on how much crude? Will we be able to produce more than Saudi Arabia seems that very soon we will be the oil producing giant of the world. Water is another issue if we use it wisely, don't deplete our aquifers then yes it will last a long time but if we are stupid and use it like there is not limit then we are going to pay dearly for that decision. It takes how many thousands of years to refill and aquifer? I don't have that answer but I read that a polluted aquifer takes a thousand years to clean itself.

Yes the liars have some true facts but they use them to their advantage and in doing so distort those facts. Ex. Climate change that was Global Warming that was Global cooling. The earth is not a static environment never was never will be that is just how it is. Can man make it worse of course, think depletion of the rain forests, will some places get much drier as others get much wetter of course it has happened before and will happen again. think of Africa, and the deserts there now that once were lush and green.

When you get all excited about this climate thing, I have to wonder if one has really looked at what has been going on with earth for as long as we have recorded documents. Will places that now can't grow oranges one day be able too? Maybe maybe not, they might be under a ton of snow or glacier only time will answer this question and that is just the point we don't know enough about the world climate to make any real decisions on what is and is not affecting because we just have too little information to base anything on it. Yes we can create models of climate in a lab, but what says that is what the real world is going to do or the direction it is going too go? Simple answer is nothing there is nothing that can forecast the weather with any consistent accuracy to be of any real value. Think I am wrong how many times have the weather predictions been wrong on just a few days into the future and yet the liars tell us they can see what it will be in a decade or longer into the future.

If the US became the green energy nation of the world would climate change be a non issue? No because their are nations that are much greater pollution producers than we have ever been or will be. So why should be cripple our ability to produce and once again become the greatest nation the world has ever seen?

[dtknowles]

So Tim since you feel we have to many people on this planet who do we exterminate and how many so we are at the proper population level? Hilter, Mao, and others have worked on this thought, so are you saying we should also do the same?

I did not say we should kill anyone and I don't believe we should. I believe we will have to live in the bed we made. Yes the planet can support the increased population but it will degenerate into something not as beautiful or fantastic as this planet has been and could be. I hope it will not become a stinking hellhole of filth and degeneration.

Tim

[dtknowles]

The earth has the capacity to handle far more people than are here now if we use resources correctly. Will it happen not in my life time and most likely not in the lifetime of grand kids either. Why simple human greed, there will always be someone that feels they are entitled, don't you just love that word, to have more than they need to life a good life, not a great life but a good life.

I have little faith that the planets resources will be used wisely but like you indicated we and our children's children will be long gone before the real crisis hits. Greed, one of the 7 deadly sins, we are all sinners.

Tim

[dtknowles]

Oil, natural gas will we run out of it? Yes it is a finite quantity that will one day be gone. Is it something to panic about? I don't think so as if we really understand that these resources have a limited life and begin to work on better ways to use the sun, water power, coal (yes I said coal) we can have what we need to a very long time.

I don't really worry about the running out of energy there is still a lot of ways to even power our cars. For a price you can make liquid motor fuel out of coal. The cost of energy will also buffer the impact as the price rises people will improve efficiency and reduce consumption.

Tim

[dtknowles]

Water is another issue if we use it wisely, don't deplete our aquifers then yes it will last a long time but if we are stupid and use it like there is not limit then we are going to pay dearly for that decision. It takes how many thousands of years to refill and aquifer? I don't have that answer but I read that a polluted aquifer takes a thousand years to clean itself.

Water will be a big challenge, some of the aquifers we are depleting were fill from the melting of the glaciers of the last ice age, to refill them will require another ice age. Some places water will remain abundant and will be in high demand. I don't have a clue about cleaning an polluted aquifer.

Tim

[dtknowles]

When you get all excited about this climate thing, I have to wonder if one has really looked at what has been going on with earth for as long as we have recorded documents........(lots of stuff cut to save space) If the US became the green energy nation of the world would climate change be a non issue? No because their are nations that are much greater pollution producers than we have ever been or will be. So why should be cripple our ability to produce and once again become the greatest nation the world has ever seen?

I think you completely misunderstood my original post, I am not at all excited or worried about climate change, it will happen, is happening, like you pointed out. I think I also pointed out that the less developed country's would overwhelm any effort on our part to prevent climate change so I don't see any point in handicapping our economy with restricts in the name of stopping climate change. Like I warned in my original post, just because I think there are too many people on the planet I would be accused of buying into the "new world order" propaganda.

I was just lamenting that the path we are unavoidably on seems to lead to a less wonderful world. I don't see any point in stepping in front of the train wreck and it will all happen is such slow motion I don't expect to be around to see how it turns out.

Oh, I believe we are still the greatest nation on the planet and that has ever been (at least since the great flood).

By most measures the USA is greater and more powerful than ever before we are just not as right as we used to be.

Tim

[jaystuw]

Tim, excellent posts! I hope that the day will never come were the most abundant resource is military age males that can be quickly trained, cheaply but effectively equipped and well armed to battle it out over what little of value is left on the planet. Jay

[dtknowles]

Tim, excellent posts! I hope that the day will never come were the most abundant resource is military age males that can be quickly trained, cheaply but effectively equipped and well armed to battle it out over what little of value is left on the planet. Jay

Jay

In the less developed areas of the world there are so many young people with nothing more meaning full to do than strap on a explosive vest and use it to kill people they don't even know that it happens almost daily. They celebrate these deaths of their children not morn. Even in the USA with our current leadership we can recruit enough soldiers that we do not need a draft.

Thru the use of machines and automation the needs and wants of the people or at least they ones they can afford can be provided for by a smaller percentage of the population leaving less meaningful work for those that want to work. Before people start taking side for and against automation, it is what it is. I do not want laws to try to fix what might be seen as a problem. Laws always seem to devolve into an agenda. I am more of a lasie faire capitalist. Let the market determine the outcome. Just understand workers with no particular skill will just be cannon fodder.

Tim

[starmac]

I want to know how anybody knows it takes a 1000 years for an aquifer to clean itself after it is polluted??? I also have to wonder about depleting them and having to wait on an ice age to replenish them. There are way too many 6 and 8 inch irrigation wells running around the clock without going dry, for them not to be somewhat replenishing themselves every year.

[dtknowles]

I want to know how anybody knows it takes a 1000 years for an aquifer to clean itself after it is polluted??? I also have to wonder about depleting them and having to wait on an ice age to replenish them. There are way too many 6 and 8 inch irrigation wells running around the clock without going dry, for them not to be somewhat replenishing themselves every year.

I certainly can't claim to be an expert but I think that shallow wells draw on what is called ground water and aquifers are much deeper. In these deep wells or at least some of them the water level continues to drop to the point that they make the wells deeper to keep them from going dry.

Even in places where you would think water would not be a problem like Coastal Florida they are pumping water out of the aquifer so fast that it does not recharge and they are getting salt water intrusion from the ocean. The aquifer recharges from ground water soaking thru the soil and rock down to the aquifer. This does not necessarily happen in a straight down manner but happens where the rock is permeable and these aquifers are sort of interconnected with deep underground flows. If the underground water press differences are wrong the ocean water pressure pushes salt water into the aquifer. In dry areas the water level in the aquifer drops if not enough water soaks down thru the soil and rock somewhere to feed the underground flows. If we cause the rain to run off to the rivers and flow out to the oceans then it does not recharge the aquifer. We have been captureing what water we can with dams which help both the recharge and reduces loss to the ocean. Demand for water is so high that we have to pull out all the stops to keep up.

Tim

[waksupi]

I want to know how anybody knows it takes a 1000 years for an aquifer to clean itself after it is polluted??? I also have to wonder about depleting them and having to wait on an ice age to replenish them. There are way too many 6 and 8 inch irrigation wells running around the clock without going dry, for them not to be somewhat replenishing themselves every year.

I had heard at one time, that water purifies itself after running over 100 yards of rock bottom in a stream. I'm inclined to believe it, as a couple dozen of us drank from a stream for 4-5 days, before someone went upstream about 400 yards, and found a maggoty old dead cow laying in the creek. No one got sick.

[dtknowles]

I had heard at one time, that water purifies itself after running over 100 yards of rock bottom in a stream. I'm inclined to believe it, as a couple dozen of us drank from a stream for 4-5 days, before someone went upstream about 400 yards, and found a maggoty old dead cow laying in the creek. No one got sick.

Running water tends to be cleaner than stagnant water. I was told when filling my canteen to go to the fast moving water that was burbling and fill it there. Air mixing with the water also helps purify the water. We would avoid drinking lake or pond water but would irrigate or do laundry and dishes with it. Definatelly ok for toilets and baths. The town we grew up in got its drinking water from a lake but it was processed. At my Uncles cabin on a pond he had made a well at a spring above the pond this spring had enough pressure to keep out the ground water and we drank this water straight from the spring. I guess you could drink the pond water if you boiled it but it looked murky the spring water was clear and tasty.

Tim

[starmac]

A lot of Kansas farms I used to cut hay from had big cat engines pulling the water up 600 feet. I don't think it was ground water. A few years back they installed meters on all the wells. The next year they limited them to 3 acre feet a year, which wasn't enough, I'm not sure what amount they were using before that, but those wells ran constantly 3 weeks a month, only shut down for us to cut the hay. I want to say the wells in eastern NM run about 300 feet deep in most places for irrigation wells. If water is not being pumped out of the aquifers, where does it wind up being used?

[blackthorn]

I believe that when the world population reaches the "saturation" level, good old Mother nature will step in and wipe out at least enough to sort of even things out. After all that is what happens in the rest of nature is it not? I also believe at least a good sized part of "population control" lies in education! If you look around, those countries with low to sustained population growth are also countries that promote education amongst their population. The above is not likely the "be-all, end-all" but I think it would go a long way to alleviating the problem.

To Jaystuw & friends---

“The Rich Man, the Poor Man, and the Politician”
…A Tale of Income Equality

There is a rich man and a poor man.
The rich man makes $1000 a day.
The poor man makes $10 a day.
The difference in their income is $1000-$10=$900 a day.

The rich man builds a factory.
Now the rich man makes $2000 a day.
He gives the poor man a job at the factory.
Now the poor man makes $100 a day.
The difference in their income is $2000-$100=$1900 a day.

The politician decides the “income gap” has grown too large.
He taxes the rich man $1000 a day and gives it to the poor man.
The rich man can no longer afford to run the factory.
He closes the factory. The poor man loses his job.

Everything is as it was before.
And the politician takes credit for “closing the income gap”.




There is a rich man and a poor man.
The rich man makes $1000 a day.
The poor man makes $10 a day.
The difference in their income is $1000-$10=$900 a day.

The rich man builds a factory.
Now the rich man makes $2000 a day.
He gives the poor man a job at the factory.
Now the poor man makes $100 a day.
The difference in their income is $2000-$100=$1900 a day.

The politician decides the “income gap” has grown too large.
He taxes the rich man $1000 a day and gives half ($500) of it to the poor man.
The other half ($500) goes into “General Revenue” and is used by the politician to “buy” votes.

The rich man can no longer afford to run the factory.
He closes the factory. The rich man and the poor man both lose income.
The taxpayer loses the tax income from both the profit of the rich man and the earnings of the poor man.

Everything is as it was before (almost). The rich man is still rich but the poor man now has no income at all and the politician continues to take credit for “closing the income gap”.

[MtGun44]

It is about climate and science. Only when some politician starts selling snake oil by calling it climate and science
does politics enter into it. I don't care one bit how someone says their politics, but I do get confused
when I am told that the weather is getting hotter when I have to shovel more snow.

I also will believe the plankton and salmon more than anybody that is making money by selling
ANY particular line of "science". Some smart guy once said "Follow the money". Lots of
folks are making money by convincing people that "the sky is falling".

Global Warming or Climate Change is just the latest way for some folks to gain
power and make money. H. L. Mencken said it well, long ago. This is nothing new.

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous
to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

H. L. Mencken

Bill

[mold maker]

We broke the high for the day yesterday (76) and are forecast to do the same today(73). Almost all the snow melted. Two weeks ago it was down to the 10s.

[starmac]

I had heard at one time, that water purifies itself after running over 100 yards of rock bottom in a stream. I'm inclined to believe it, as a couple dozen of us drank from a stream for 4-5 days, before someone went upstream about 400 yards, and found a maggoty old dead cow laying in the creek. No one got sick.

I have drank out of many mountain streams and springs, and what I always heard was the stream had to be running so fast, I don't remember how fast, for it to be safe to drink. I have also drank out of stock tanks, that had visible stuff growing in them, with never an ill effect, What you will drink depends on how thirsty you are I think. lol
We had a place in east texas when I was a kid, that the well water had a sulphur smell to it. It was probably safe to drink, but it was only about a half a mile to a spring that bubbled out of the ground with clear sweet water. I was 6 years old at the time and fetching the drinking water was one of my chores.

[dtknowles]

A lot of Kansas farms I used to cut hay from had big cat engines pulling the water up 600 feet. I don't think it was ground water. A few years back they installed meters on all the wells. The next year they limited them to 3 acre feet a year, which wasn't enough, I'm not sure what amount they were using before that, but those wells ran constantly 3 weeks a month, only shut down for us to cut the hay. I want to say the wells in eastern NM run about 300 feet deep in most places for irrigation wells. If water is not being pumped out of the aquifers, where does it wind up being used?

Not all aquifers are the same but the big, deep one in the Midwest is like a giant underground reservoir, I don't think the water goes much of anywhere, just sits there with some being added (recharged) by the soaking in of rain water and snow melt, often the recharge comes from some other place via underground flows. By long term monitoring of the depth to the water and consumption, the recharge rate can be calculated. Attempts to regulate consumption are problematic as the aquifer does not recognize political borders so unless the rules are set to cover everything pulling from the aquifer and the source of recharge then you are just punishing the people affected by the rules and not really saving the aquifer.

Tim

[dtknowles]

I believe that when the world population reaches the "saturation" level, good old Mother nature will step in and wipe out at least enough to sort of even things out. After all that is what happens in the rest of nature is it not? I also believe at least a good sized part of "population control" lies in education! If you look around, those countries with low to sustained population growth are also countries that promote education amongst their population. The above is not likely the "be-all, end-all" but I think it would go a long way to alleviating the problem.

We seem to be pretty good at combating the work of Mother Nature, the diseases that would normally prevent population overcrowding now have preventions and cures. The political actions (wars and genocide) that would limit population are also being reduced. Education by itself does not slow population growth it is the income security that comes with education or a social safety net, so a person is not dependent on there children to support them in old age.

Tim

[dtknowles]

I have drank out of many mountain streams and springs, and what I always heard was the stream had to be running so fast, I don't remember how fast, for it to be safe to drink. I have also drank out of stock tanks, that had visible stuff growing in them, with never an ill effect, What you will drink depends on how thirsty you are I think. lol
We had a place in east texas when I was a kid, that the well water had a sulphur smell to it. It was probably safe to drink, but it was only about a half a mile to a spring that bubbled out of the ground with clear sweet water. I was 6 years old at the time and fetching the drinking water was one of my chores.

Some of us are more tolerant of things in the water that will make other people sick. I have drunk from many streams and springs but they were almost all in back country. I did try some water from an artesian well in south east Mississippi that smelled a little of sulfur with no ill effects. I would not drink untreated water from the Mississippi or the Pearl River unless I had no other options and I am prepared to treat that water even if I only boil it.

Tim

[shdwlkr]

Are you refering to the Ogallala Aquifer if so check out the link below
http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Oc-Po/Ogallala-Aquifer.html

check this out " The Ogallala Aquifer (shaded area) is in a state of overdraft owing to the current rate of water use. If withdrawals continue unabated, the aquifer could be depleted in only a few decades.
between the mountains and the existing western boundary of the Ogallala, so there is no longer water recharge being received from the Rockies."

Read more: http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Oc-Po/Ogallala-Aquifer.html#ixzz2tuaHVOwz

[starmac]

I know they have limited the use of water in areas using the aquifer. In NM they at one time quit giving out permits for dairies, as they require a lot of water, in kansas, at least in some areas they metered the irrigation wells and limited the amount you could use. It seems like they restricted the dairy permits in some parts of Texas too. Now for the funny part about the way our wonderful government works. My wifes uncle sold his farm and all equipment, and bought a ranch, with the ranch he bought the water rights that went with it, but had never in the lifetime of the earth been used. The water rights cost about the same as the land, and are transferable meaning you own them and can sell them to someone with farm land wanting to irrigate. He bought them for an investment and had no plans to sell or use them, but along comes the government. All of a sudden they decide that if he doesn't drill wells and irrigate they wil just take them away from him, remember he paid as much for the rights as he did the actual land. lol He had to go in debt and drill wells, buy circle sprinklers and farm equipment and start farming what he wanted to run cattle on, this land had never been turned under, until they came up with this, so forever more there is several hundred more acres using water to grow crops even though he didn't even want to. lol Conservation at it's finest. lol

[dtknowles]

Are you refering to the Ogallala Aquifer if so check out the link below
http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Oc-Po/Ogallala-Aquifer.html

check this out " The Ogallala Aquifer (shaded area) is in a state of overdraft owing to the current rate of water use. If withdrawals continue unabated, the aquifer could be depleted in only a few decades.
between the mountains and the existing western boundary of the Ogallala, so there is no longer water recharge being received from the Rockies."

Read more: http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Oc-Po/Ogallala-Aquifer.html#ixzz2tuaHVOwz

Yes that is the Aquifer I was talking about. I had not read that page before but it is consistent with other stories I had read. I will not claim to be able to confirm the facts. My understanding of the subject is limited. I don't have a answer for how to properly manage the resource, it is a case were it crosses state lines but the Feds are likely to screw it up.

Tim

[MtGun44]

Colarado has been stealing KS water for many decades. A couple of Attorney Generals back, the KS AG successfully
sued CO for millions and got paid. Not sure if they are still stealing the water, but probably are and probably
figure that they can get away with it for another long while before the next court case is filed.

And by stealing, I mean violating a long standing written agreement between state governments on how much
water they have to leave in the Arkansas River, and perhaps others. I think this is a major reason that the
Ogalala aquifer is not refilling now like it used to.

Bill

[dtknowles]

Alabama and Florida are in court with Georgia over water rights. Water is going to be a bigger issue going forward.

Tim

[starmac]

I don't know if Colorado is still stealing it or not, but the last I knew you could drive across the arkansas up by charleston without getting your tires damp.

[MtGun44]

Used to be a river and that is what the agreement (actually think it is a treaty) between the states
was for. And, yes, much of the time in KS that Arkansas River is bone dry.

Bill

[starmac]

Well tell me this, I have seen the arkansas dry for years at a time at charlston, but get over witchita way and it will be a raging river, where does that water come from??

[DRNurse1]

I wonder what the weather is like in the middle east, and if Allah adjusts according to the behavior of the people? Perhaps CBS will know...

Gear

Aren't they stuck in an arid, hot climate with minimal vegetation and little water. H3ll on earth right?

[DRNurse1]

I don't know if Colorado is still stealing it or not, but the last I knew you could drive across the arkansas up by charleston without getting your tires damp.

I think that method is called 'crossing a bridge'---:kidding:---:groner:

[starmac]

I think that method is called 'crossing a bridge'---:kidding:---:groner:

LOL good point. If the bridge wasn't there you would not know you crossed. I even knew a large farmer that spent big bucks with dozer work leveling the river out and installed 2 circle sprinklers IN the river bottom before the corp of engineers got wind of it, and then he spent even bigger bucks returning it back into a dry river. lol

[jaystuw]

Blackthorn, I read your tale of income equality, twice. Very amusing. It might be worth noting that I am a liberal Democrat. That being said, The educational value of this tale is for me, somewhat low. I am not really the best audience for this line of thinking. But thanks anyway. Jay

[shdwlkr]

Tim
One way to begin to mange the water better is to not irrigate when the sun is shining. Why because you get more evaporation from the water drops when the sun is shining and I have to wonder if we really understand the water needs of the crop we are growing.
If the feds and I am not sure they aren't meddling in anything it is sure to fail and fail in a big way.

A long time ago I was looking at a small farm in Utah that grew all kinds of fruits and vegetables. The water resource for the place was marginal at best. But the neighbor that was the last one on the irrigation ditch and had the oldest water rights would allow some of his water to go to this place for payment of the fruits and vegetables his family needed. No he didn't gouge, he took only what he needed and the small place made some money too. That is one example of how you use water properly and wisely. No I didn't buy the place went back to NYS to finish my career there and thought I would never leave, now wonder if I left soon enough. I don't even recognize the place any more, properties are run down, everything costs too much and the taxes are just out of sight.

Another smart thing to do concerning proper/good use of water is to have smaller farms and ranches like we used to have instead of these mega operations. Nope not saying with the way things are going right now that a small place is better than a large one just it seems more small operations would keep more folks busy and enjoying life more. Yea I grew up working on a dairy farm and hope one day before it is too late to again go back to farming, no not dairy to much work at my age and too many hours to make it work. Yes just a frustrated farm kid looking to go back to a simple and really slower life.

[MtGun44]

Small farms = small incomes. With modern equipment, it take a fairly large operation to
break even. That is from several friends that moved off of farms when they could.

I have a friend that used to run an 80,000 acre wheat farm in east CO and west KS. Now
THAT was quite an operation. That would be 11.2 miles on a side if it was contiguous, which
it was not. Now HE was successful and retired very well off.

Bill

[shdwlkr]

Bill if you read my post you would have seen I said, "Nope not saying with the way things are going right now that a small place is better than a large one just it seems more small operations would keep more folks busy and enjoying life more."

I have friends that have wheat ranches here in Idaho and yes they are huge in the thousands of acres, but they also take thousands of gallons of water to get those wheat crops.

I also know that we have the fewest working farms/ranches in the nation that they are beginning to wonder if we have enough people growing our food. But who really knows what the real answer is.

Me if I can ever get my own place it will be a small spread of between 900 and a few thousand acres just to keep me active and not thinking of other things. All depends on what the place I find has for acres and yes how much it costs. Oh well just hope to live long enough to have a place of my own. Here water rights are more important sometimes then how big or small a place is. The places with older rights are best and yes they come up for sale once in a while.

[MtGun44]

I don't disagree with anything you said, just pointing out the sad fact, that while it is a nice
lifestyle (in some ways, very hard work) the financial end just doesn't work too well for most crops until you
reach some substantial size. Used to be 40 acres would work, but plowing with a mule was
the height of technology in those days. The cost of 1000 acres is a LOT of money!!

The large KS/CO wheat farm is dry land farming, no irrigation. Irrigation is a huge boon to
crops, but in the long run water sources are short and you can salt up the soil, too. Water is
an absolutely non-negotiable requirement for life, and we do live on and farm a lot of land
that has too little rain for much in the way of crops, so water rights are huge.
Good luck with your search. IMO, farmers are generally really good stewards of the land.

It's my thread so "Let her drift!". :bigsmyl2:

Bill

[starmac]

What does sa wheat ranch look like????? LOL Sorry I just couldn't help it.

[shdwlkr]

Bill
Just so you have and idea and I am sure you do, a 1000 acres can hit 7 figures real fast here if it has good water and very old water rights. One place I looked at that was just over 950 acres that was listed at 2.8 million dollars. Yep the cost of good land is going up. I have seen an acre of good ground for sale at $75,000 here.

I got a family member that is thinking of maybe building again should be interesting the way things are headed right now. Yes they would like a farm/ranch just like me so who knows what the future might bring.

Fuel costs are getting really to be more of an issue than water in some places here and yet they still spend the money. This year water here just might be an interesting issues as some places are already way short on water. The recent snow and rain have helped but just how much is still up for debate.

I traveled across the country 2 years ago and it was a real interesting to see what happens where there is no water and the corn doesn't grow. Miles and miles of short burn useless corn and the grass what there was of it just wasn't taking care of the animals need for food. Sorry I know a hungry animal when I see them, just not something you don't like to see.
I know the farmer coming out again, Dad sure messed me up for life being an Ag Engineer and then a Hydraulic Engineer I followed pretty much in my life. I grew up working on a neighbors farm and then went into civil engineering. I did the field work that dad did in the office. Was funny when I would come into the office and talk with dad about what he had designed and why. He has been gone now for a decade and I sure do miss him. He was a good resource on farming right up until just before he died.

[dtknowles]

Tim
One way to begin to mange the water better is to not irrigate when the sun is shining. Why because you get more evaporation from the water drops when the sun is shining and I have to wonder if we really understand the water needs of the crop we are growing.
If the feds and I am not sure they aren't meddling in anything it is sure to fail and fail in a big way.

A long time ago I was looking at a small farm in Utah that grew all kinds of fruits and vegetables. The water resource for the place was marginal at best. But the neighbor that was the last one on the irrigation ditch and had the oldest water rights would allow some of his water to go to this place for payment of the fruits and vegetables his family needed. No he didn't gouge, he took only what he needed and the small place made some money too. That is one example of how you use water properly and wisely. No I didn't buy the place went back to NYS to finish my career there and thought I would never leave, now wonder if I left soon enough. I don't even recognize the place any more, properties are run down, everything costs too much and the taxes are just out of sight.

Another smart thing to do concerning proper/good use of water is to have smaller farms and ranches like we used to have instead of these mega operations. Nope not saying with the way things are going right now that a small place is better than a large one just it seems more small operations would keep more folks busy and enjoying life more. Yea I grew up working on a dairy farm and hope one day before it is too late to again go back to farming, no not dairy to much work at my age and too many hours to make it work. Yes just a frustrated farm kid looking to go back to a simple and really slower life.

I am not qualified to discuss how to run the agribusiness. I worked on farms as a kid, dairy, potato/corn. My uncle owned a truck farm and farm stand but I only visited. I have a high school friend who farms potato/corn. The whole time I was growing up none of the farms used irrigation but my friend started irrigating ten years ago. He does not irrigate every year or every field and there is plenty of water there in central Maine but the labor and fuel cost are to be avoided if there is plenty of rain. His is a small farm and they have his wife's income so they do alright. My Dad bought a vineyard in Maryland that came with some farm land but Dad leased the fields to a crop farmer because he was only interested in the grapes.

I saw small farm life first hand and I know it is good for the soul, hard work, productive, great way to raise kids. I am thankful for every hour of labor and association I had with the farms I worked on. It is not a way to get rich.

I expect that if you own or manage a big farm it is way different more like running a big business, capital investment, personnel management, hedging, insurance, etc. done right you could get rich and you hire people to do the hard work you run it from an office and a big fancy truck.

Tim

[starmac]

I tend to think paying the interest on 2.8 million bucks off the harvest on 950 acres would be rough, unless he is an established farmer with more acreage to work with.
I worked for a medium sized farmer when I was in high school, every year he would have to buy equipment for tax reasons. Every year when he filled out his farm loan papers, the bank would tell him he had too much equipment for the acreage he had. To satisfy the bank he would have to buy s half section to satisfy the bank and get his farm loan. lol

[shdwlkr]

Starmac
If it ever happens it will offset the income from another business that I may end up with. Just like the big boys do the ranch/farm will help with taxes. It will be my home residence and a place to unwind. It will have to pay me in ways that money only could never do.

I have no desire to make it a money maker only, if it makes enough to pay taxes and help pay for toys on the place and give me and others food and peace and enjoyment it has meant the need it was acquired for.

No interest payments as it would most likely be a cash deal, so the cost will govern to some extent the size and location. I have seen many places that come close to what I want, but at this point in time I am not able to jump on any of them. Life has just got in the way to often and hopefully that is changing.

Starmac you should see some of the prices being asked for land up here, sometimes it just scares me.

[starmac]

Too many celebrities and people needing tax right offs have decided it was cool to own a farm or ranch, and it has inflated the prices to where a farmer can't hardly pay for one farming anymore. One bad year puts many in the poor house, when they can't make the interest. I have been to farm sales where they sold the mans dog house and luggage. It seems like they were lucky to have a vehicle to drive off in.

[shdwlkr]

starmac
My place is far from being a rich person write off, never will be. I will most likely spend $100 on the place for every dollar it might give me in write off funds.

It will be a place where I can try out farming techniques and see which save money and which cost money on the small scale. If I have 30 head of animals that will be a lot of animals for me, Now as to a garden area that just might be an acre or maybe a little more, an orchard that takes up a few acres that is possible, a grape vineyard that takes up and acre, a strawberry patch that takes up half an acre, a shooting range that takes up a lot of ground maybe, hay fields and grazing land, woods and maybe a pond. Yep the place will save me lots of money not, more likely it will cost more than I ever see in tax savings and that is fine.

Now if by some strange luck with lady luck I have real money one day it will be put into 19,000 acres of ground and Yes that will be a place to make and loose money based on the year. Why so much land? I have family that just might need a job one day and that size place will handle their need to be employed and have a reason to get up each day. It will have a few thousand head of beef cows, a few thousand acres of wheat and yes a few thousand acres of range land and forest.

I am a farm kid and would love to find farm land priced at where a farm kid could afford it. But when you see good farm ground go for $40,000 an acre that is just a dream. I have seen whole ranches bought for millions only to see in a few months it is now a housing development and the 5 acre lots maybe 20 acre lots go for a mere $70,000 and people just jump at the chance to own some rural land.

My farm/ranch will not be real close to a large community and that takes the easy possibility of it becoming a housing development when I am finished with it out of the equation maybe. It will be rural and be less that easy to get too. Yea when I am home I like to hear the birds, ducks, geese, see the deer, bears, and other critters wandering around the place. I also like my solitude and to be able to see God's handy work we call each day.

I like the smell of new cut grass, hay in a barn, the sound of cattle talking to each other in the field and each new life shows me just how precious it is. Yes I know there are wolves and coyotes in my state that like my critters for dinner but I also like to keep in practice of keeping them at bay. I like to wander around the grazing ground and woods to see how things are going. I like to wander in the stream or pond that runs through my ground. I would hope that my time of having this land, water and such that I can leave it in a better shape than I found it for the next tenant as we are all just renters in this life. None of can take any of our worldly possessions with us when we leave, they will be left behind for the next individual to use, sell, exploit or destroy.

In the past I have taken marginal ground and helped it become better ground. It takes years to do this and sometimes it works and sometimes nature steps in and shows you that it is best left in its original state. You have to watch the land, stream, pond that you want to change and see if it really is the best for it, not you.

I so much enjoy the smell of fresh turned earth and to feel it texture in my hand, dad taught me that decades ago, the smell of a fresh spring rain on the air, even sometimes as it approaches, the smell of blossoms on the fruit trees, the buzzing of bees in the strawberry patch and garden. the humming bird coming to your feeder, the different birds that call your place home and watching to see how well they are doing.

Yes starmac my place will be a tax right off, but not in the way you maybe first thought when I wrote it. Life is just part of our journey through our existence. One day I will be maybe nothing more than soil enhancement material just like the animals that die in the woods, fields and valleys of this world in some many remote places. We think because we can do so many things that we can rule by power, money and wealth but in the end we will all leave this life one day and that will never change as it is part of the life cycle. We are conceived, born, live and die. that is how the cycle was created and it is to teach us to understand that nothing here is permanent, nothing here but our experiences, interactions and knowledge we gain have any real value.

We can be the richest person on earth and we will still one day die, just like the grass each fall, the trees in the forest, the animals in the fields and forest, the plants we plant to give us food. Each has a purpose and each has a life cycle.

Hope you now understand the tax write off my place will give me better.

[shdwlkr]

starmac
Just for food for thought the farms I worked on as kid growing up close to 30 of them only 2 are still farms the others are just vacant ground in many cases. If I could have that ground it would be great. But the taxes in that state are way to much for me to even think about, the value of that ground is more in places to build houses than grow crops. One of them is mostly just an airport runway as that is what that rural community needed more than a place to grow food. So now it is a big pile of dirt with asphalt on it so the rich guys who fly in to check on their business ventures don't have to drive for an hour to get there.

I hope to find my farm/ranch one day before I am too old and broken down to be able to enjoy it. I may only be able to wheel me in my wheel chair out onto the porch when I can get it but I will still be able to enjoy it only much differently than planned.

[square butte]

What state has the strongest private property protections (as land owners) against federal intrusion. Have often thought of starting anew in the same way you imagine - But would want to choose wisely - Given the current state of affairs and trajectory. Western land owners seem to be hit hardest with federal intrusion, as Bill Weddle can attest to. I used to subscribe to Range Magazine - but grew saddened by all the negative stories.

[shdwlkr]

None really as the Feds can make any state anything they want really.
My state is fighting the EPA right now hope they win.
Government owns to much of the western lands for no other reason than control.
If you think it is bad in the west go look at some of the eastern states and their rules on farms and sales of said products.

[square butte]

Well, I tend to think some states are more willing to put themselves in between the Citizens and an over zealous fed - if you will. At least that is turning out to be the case with 2nd amendment issues. That is the issue that seems to receive the must publicity. But are any states more likely to take similar measures with regards to land ownership. An example would be Montana - which has a wolf hunting season which somewhat mitigates ranches problems with livestock loses. I just don't see too much discussion about land ownership protection in this context - A states rights issue if you will. Fed seizure of water rights, EPA and USDA overstep seam to be most troubling.

[shdwlkr]

We the people have to rein in the Federal Government as they are our employees not the other way around and until that happens rights, freedoms and even where and how we live will always be in jeopardy from a Government that sees its role to rule us.

[quilbilly]

What state has the strongest private property protections (as land owners) against federal intrusion. Have often thought of starting anew in the same way you imagine - But would want to choose wisely - Given the current state of affairs and trajectory. Western land owners seem to be hit hardest with federal intrusion, as Bill Weddle can attest to. I used to subscribe to Range Magazine - but grew saddened by all the negative stories. The stories there make me sad too but if you are to fight the good fight, you have to know what is going on. Range Magazine is probably the most politically incorrect magazine around and worth the price. For the record, I am a firm believer in the sagebrush rebellion and do what I can to support it.