Global Warming to Impact A's New Stadium?

Parlay2k · 02-05-2007, 10:23 PM

Will global warming swamp new stadium?

I particularly like the "dry" sense of humor from team spokesman Jim Young, "A century is a long way off, and I won't be available for comment in a hundred years when it becomes a problem.''

GreenMachine · 02-06-2007, 03:31 PM

You're just trying to mess wtih my head, aren't you, Parley? And don't even get me started on that whole "global warming" hoax...

oaktown2 · 02-06-2007, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

You're just trying to mess wtih my head, aren't you, Parley? And don't even get me started on that whole "global warming" hoax...

I don't think I even need to say that global warming isn't a hoax. Read up on the scientific summit in Paris last week. It is a fact. Having said that, the idea that a three foot rise in ocean level over the next 100 years is a barrier to an A's stadium in Fremont is absurd.

Parlay2k · 02-06-2007, 10:34 PM

"Global warming" & "Global cooling" cycles have happened throughout Earth's history...it's how we come in and out of Ice Age(s)....the question this time, as I see it, is man the cause of this one - or just contributing in some (arguably) insignificant manner? For clear thinkers, I believe the latter is the correct answer.

ak4na2 · 02-08-2007, 03:50 AM

well it does seem like it is getting colder and colder in the bay.. and last year we had a whole freaking month of rain..

Sommers · 02-08-2007, 08:07 AM

I say move the stadium to higher ground. It appears the sea level will rise, and not in 100 years. Maybe 20 or 30 years. And not 3 feet, but maybe 10 to 20 feet.

Seems the ice caps are melting at a increasingly rapid pace. Ice caps reflect the heat of the sun back into space, the oceans absorb the heat from the sun. Warmer oceans melt the ice faster. It's an naturally accelerating process. That's without the greenhouse effects of the fossil fuels.

Beach front property is probably not a wise investment in the near to intermediate term.

ToddyBaseball · 02-09-2007, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parlay2k

"Global warming" & "Global cooling" cycles have happened throughout Earth's history...it's how we come in and out of Ice Age(s)....the question this time, as I see it, is man the cause of this one - or just contributing in some (arguably) insignificant manner? For clear thinkers, I believe the latter is the correct answer.

Spend a couple hours with a copy of An Inconvenient Truth. I'll even buy the DVD for you if you're willing to put your opinion to the test and watch it.

Parlay2k · 02-10-2007, 02:18 AM

Toddy, as you well know, there are countless respected scientists who fervently disagree with that book and its author, the internet inventor. Lord knows he's never made any claims that have been called into question.

Thanks for the offer, though...Since it came from you, I know it was sincere.

Nimajneb · 02-10-2007, 03:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parlay2k

Toddy, as you well know, there are countless respected scientists who fervently disagree with that book and its author, the internet inventor. Lord knows he's never made any claims that have been called into question.

Hardly "countless."

But brief suggested reading, if you're interested...

RealClimate » Al Gore’s movie

Parlay2k · 02-10-2007, 01:28 PM

None of which contradicts the point that the Earth does go through normal natural cooling and warming cycles and always has, without man's influence. No doubt man has contributed since the industrial revolution. The open question is to what extent. There is no smoking gun answer to that question. What's entertaining, I suppose, is when either side claims there is.

linusalf · 02-16-2007, 05:34 PM

so its perfectly ok to burn excess amounts of fossil fuels and relese excess amounts of CO and CO2 in the atmosphere. ok.

sheesh, tell me what has big buisness done for the common man that so many people are go out of their way to defend.

Parlay2k · 02-17-2007, 01:25 PM

"Excess amounts"? What does that even mean? I use enough to get back and forth to work and to heat/cool my home. Is that too much?

My employer uses enough to generate more revenue than expenses and to keep me employed. Is that too much?

As soon as there's a viable alternative energy source, I'm in. For now, my 32-mpg car runs on unleaded.

And what has "Big Business" done for the common man?

Such a silly, sophomoric question - it's undeserving of a reply.

Regardless of your orientation, sometimes the "other" side of the political spectrum from your own is right. Sometimes. It doesn't hurt to keep an open mind.

Here's a book that completely contradicts Al Gore's effort. Complete with statistics, support from scientists, the works.

Amazon.com: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism): Books: Christopher C. Horner

As said before, there is no smoking gun on either side of this one. Try not to pretend there is.

ToddyBaseball · 02-18-2007, 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parlay2k

Here's a book that completely contradicts Al Gore's effort. Complete with statistics, support from scientists, the works.

Amazon.com: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism): Books: Christopher C. Horner

Chris Horner is a lawyer and a senior fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, an organization that receives most of its annual funding from ExxonMobile. I got through about half this book when review copies shipped, which is about how long it took to get completely fed up with his corruption of legitimate scientific studies. He cherry picks data and then interprets it in a manner that misrepresents even the researchers' conclusions. I've heard more compelling arguments against Global Warming from homeless people riding the 43 line here in the city.

Eckersley · 02-18-2007, 01:20 PM

Citing Chris Horner's books as authority. Wow.

Parlay2K, the secret to understanding any issue is to read people you DON'T agree with, so you can recognize the weaknesses in books like Horner's. People who talk to, and read, people they agree with let each other get away with sloppy thinking because there's no challenge there.

There may be legitimate scientific challenges to the man-made global warming theory, but they are getting harder and harder to find. Even GWB is now on board that train.

John F · 02-18-2007, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parlay2k

Toddy, as you well know, there are countless respected scientists who fervently disagree with that book and its author.sincere.

Name one.

And while you are at it, name how many of those scientists are backed by Exxon-Mobile who is trying to debunk Global Warming and offering cash prizes to Scientists who speak out against it. This on the heels of several hundred scientists concluded Climate Change with thanks to Global Warming is happening and Man is helping it along greatly.

Global Warming - Global Warming is Unstoppable and Humans are to Blame, says UN Report

02-05-2007, 10:23 PM	#1 (permalink)
Parlay2k Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 17	Global Warming to Impact A's New Stadium? Will global warming swamp new stadium? I particularly like the "dry" sense of humor from team spokesman Jim Young, "A century is a long way off, and I won't be available for comment in a hundred years when it becomes a problem.''

02-06-2007, 03:31 PM	#2 (permalink)
GreenMachine Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 30	You're just trying to mess wtih my head, aren't you, Parley? And don't even get me started on that whole "global warming" hoax... Last edited by GreenMachine; 02-06-2007 at 04:17 PM.

02-06-2007, 10:34 PM	#4 (permalink)
Parlay2k Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 17	GM, I'm with you... "Global warming" & "Global cooling" cycles have happened throughout Earth's history...it's how we come in and out of Ice Age(s)....the question this time, as I see it, is man the cause of this one - or just contributing in some (arguably) insignificant manner? For clear thinkers, I believe the latter is the correct answer.

02-08-2007, 08:07 AM	#6 (permalink)
Sommers Rookie Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 4	global warming I say move the stadium to higher ground. It appears the sea level will rise, and not in 100 years. Maybe 20 or 30 years. And not 3 feet, but maybe 10 to 20 feet. Seems the ice caps are melting at a increasingly rapid pace. Ice caps reflect the heat of the sun back into space, the oceans absorb the heat from the sun. Warmer oceans melt the ice faster. It's an naturally accelerating process. That's without the greenhouse effects of the fossil fuels. Beach front property is probably not a wise investment in the near to intermediate term.

02-18-2007, 01:20 PM	#14 (permalink)
Eckersley Rookie Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 7	Wow Citing Chris Horner's books as authority. Wow. Parlay2K, the secret to understanding any issue is to read people you DON'T agree with, so you can recognize the weaknesses in books like Horner's. People who talk to, and read, people they agree with let each other get away with sloppy thinking because there's no challenge there. There may be legitimate scientific challenges to the man-made global warming theory, but they are getting harder and harder to find. Even GWB is now on board that train.

02-08-2007, 03:50 AM	#5 (permalink)
ak4na2 Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 103	well it does seem like it is getting colder and colder in the bay.. and last year we had a whole freaking month of rain..

02-10-2007, 02:18 AM	#8 (permalink)
Parlay2k Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 17	Toddy, as you well know, there are countless respected scientists who fervently disagree with that book and its author, the internet inventor. Lord knows he's never made any claims that have been called into question. Thanks for the offer, though...Since it came from you, I know it was sincere.

02-10-2007, 01:28 PM	#10 (permalink)
Parlay2k Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 17	None of which contradicts the point that the Earth does go through normal natural cooling and warming cycles and always has, without man's influence. No doubt man has contributed since the industrial revolution. The open question is to what extent. There is no smoking gun answer to that question. What's entertaining, I suppose, is when either side claims there is.

02-16-2007, 05:34 PM	#11 (permalink)
linusalf Rookie Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3	so its perfectly ok to burn excess amounts of fossil fuels and relese excess amounts of CO and CO2 in the atmosphere. ok. sheesh, tell me what has big buisness done for the common man that so many people are go out of their way to defend.

02-17-2007, 01:25 PM	#12 (permalink)
Parlay2k Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 17	"Excess amounts"? What does that even mean? I use enough to get back and forth to work and to heat/cool my home. Is that too much? My employer uses enough to generate more revenue than expenses and to keep me employed. Is that too much? As soon as there's a viable alternative energy source, I'm in. For now, my 32-mpg car runs on unleaded. And what has "Big Business" done for the common man? Such a silly, sophomoric question - it's undeserving of a reply. Regardless of your orientation, sometimes the "other" side of the political spectrum from your own is right. Sometimes. It doesn't hurt to keep an open mind. Here's a book that completely contradicts Al Gore's effort. Complete with statistics, support from scientists, the works. Amazon.com: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism): Books: Christopher C. Horner As said before, there is no smoking gun on either side of this one. Try not to pretend there is.