Meteorological Winter 2018 Banter

[JerseyWx]

9 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

It's idiotic how emotional deniers get like if it somehow effects them personally that there is climate change.

They should get so mad at corrupt corporations that cover up research, pollute the environment and put unsafe chemicals in our food and cease private land to build dirty pipelines.

You know the type of low information people I am talking about- the ones that specifically follow the low IQ orange skinned moron that is our dictator-in-chief, while he criticizes other forms of government that are far more democratic and the fact is he is far more authoritarian than any one he criticizes and a lot more like the ones he supports- like Saudi Arabia and North Korea.  He's the intellectual equivalent of a Flat Earther.

 

 

 

Well I encourage you to have a stay in North Korea for awhile and then get back to me on that point.

[LongBeachSurfFreak]

22 hours ago, jfklganyc said:

From the Feb thread “Our climate is changing. We will see more blockbuster seasons for the next few decades before we eventually reach a critical mass and temps are too warm for snow“

 

 

Why did you take my quote out of context? Because I said “our climate is changing”? 

Stuck patters are a thing of the future and thus feast or famine winters. Though this one may have tricks up its sleeve as a result of seasonal wave length change.

And to deniers, I promise if this topic hadn’t become a political football you wouldn’t be so blind

[Snowshack]

4 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

 

And to deniers, I promise if this topic hadn’t become a political football you wouldn’t be so blind

Well said.  Disheartening that so many people just tow the party line and think this is all just tree hugging.  

[the_other_guy]

No need for it to get political...just look at the numbers. It is what it is. Quite simple

[uncle W]

snow depth on February 20th for Central Park since 1958...maybe 2019 will make this list...

1979...16"

2014...15"

2003...12"

2015.....9"

1994.....7"

1964.....6"

1969.....6"

1958.....5"

1978.....5"

2010.....4"

1983.....3"

1963.....2"

1972.....2"

1977.....2"

1996.....2"

1962.....1"

1967.....1"

2000.....1"
 

[Cheticus]

Who let the kooks out?

[weatherpruf]

39 minutes ago, jfklganyc said:

No need for it to get political...just look at the numbers. It is what it is. Quite simple

The facts are true whether people believe them or not.

[Juliancolton]

9 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

Human caused mass extinctions like the one we are in now are far far worse because of the way they happen.  Make no mistake about it, humanity is in a much more fragile point than most people realize.  We are dependent on these species, because we are part of the environment and what happens to it happens to us.  The only way it will really even out is when humanity is gone from the planet- one way or another.

Human land usage, like animal agriculture, and usage of pesticides are big problems.  And the number of people on the planet is bordering on unmanageable.  We'll reach a crossroads at some point, either colonize space or face extinction.

GMOs are a viable and complete solution to all of these problems. Sadly, I don't think it's going to be an easy sell for the uninitiated.

[Dan76]

As long as people keep making people this whole conversation is useless,

[weatherpruf]

46 minutes ago, jfklganyc said:

No need for it to get political...just look at the numbers. It is what it is. Quite simple

It is political, because one side made it so. Unlike the anti-vaccine groups, which similarly deny the science but represent a  somewhat broader political spectrum, climate change denial is squarely in the realm of one political affiliation, and one that exists in only one country. But climate change science itself isn't political. Even the US military accepts it, and they are hardly tree-hugging libs.

[Juliancolton]

16 minutes ago, weatherpruf said:

Scientists are generally not opposed to GMO's. We've been doing it for centuries. Cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, brussels sprouts, and kale all were developed from some ancestral plant, and the seedlings all look alike. Corn also was bred into its current form, as were many crops. We just have technology to speed the process up now. Though I must admit, the idea of salmon infused with eel genes to make them grow faster does seem icky, but doesn't make them any less edible.

I agree. I think it is important for transparency's sake to distinguish between selective breeding by ye olde forebears on their little allotments, and targeted gene editing using modern technology. The result is the same, as far as anyone can tell, but like you say, transgenic organisms can be disconcerting in principle.

But as usual with this sort of thing, scientists are not the problem... they can only tell us their findings, but they can't dictate policy. That's left up to the politicians with no background in the subject, an agenda to uphold, and constituents to appease at all costs. A certain senator and presidential hopeful exemplifies this with his anti-biotech soundbites and legislation in spite of being bombarded with evidence that GMOs are perfectly safe and enormously beneficial.

[LibertyBell]

22 minutes ago, Juliancolton said:

GMOs are a viable and complete solution to all of these problems. Sadly, I don't think it's going to be an easy sell for the uninitiated.

They cant solve climate change issues though, or biodiversity problems.  Also we've seen issues arise with them with the environment, specifically with overusage of pesticides that were specifically manufactured for them and the rise of superweeds.  There's a new technology called CRISPR which is far better than GMO and which are now replacing them.  The GMO debacle can be blamed on near monopolies by corporations with awful histories like Dow and Monsanto, whose pesticides have been directly linked to brain damage plus the over-arching influence they have had in government policies because of dark money lobbying.  These pesticides have now been found in the bloodstream of children.  That's because of pesticide spraying happening near schools and exposure of pregnant women by pesticides being used on these crops.  The new generation of CRISPR products will completely do away with the "need" for Glyphosate or Dicamba, or any other environment endangering pesticides.

 

[LibertyBell]

4 minutes ago, Juliancolton said:

I agree. I think it is important for transparency's sake to distinguish between selective breeding by ye olde forebears on their little allotments, and selective gene editing using modern technology. The result is the same, as far as anyone can tell, but like you say, transgenic organisms can be disconcerting in principle.

But as usual with this sort of thing, scientists are not the problem... they can only tell us their findings, but they can't dictate policy. That's left up to the politicians with no background in the subject, an agenda to uphold, and constituents to appease at all costs. A certain senator and presidential hopeful exemplifies this with his anti-biotech soundbites and legislation in spite of being bombarded with evidence that GMOs are perfectly safe and enormously beneficial.

I blame the large companies that are in favor of profits over environmental concerns.  New tech developed by nonprofits and universities are generally better because they aren't tied in to these pesticides.  You can see the problems with big ag and pesticides playing out across the South as the pesticides these companies have created are ravaging the environment down there.  Anyway the point is moot, since CRISPR is now replacing GMO, so the GMO era will soon be over.

 

[JustinRP37]

Just now, LibertyBell said:

I blame the large companies that are in favor of profits over environmental concerns.  New tech developed by nonprofits and universities are generally better because they aren't tied in to these pesticides.  You can see the problems with big ag and pesticides playing out across the South as the pesticides these companies have created are ravaging the environment down there.  Anyway the point is moot, since CRISPR is now replacing GMO, so the GMO era will soon be over.

 

As a scientist who has worked with CRISPR I can tell you that anything modified with this technology will be labeled GMO. CRISPR allows us to edit genes etc, it is literally the definition of a GMO. 

[LibertyBell]

3 minutes ago, JustinRP37 said:

As a scientist who has worked with CRISPR I can tell you that anything modified with this technology will be labeled GMO. CRISPR allows us to edit genes etc, it is literally the definition of a GMO. 

But with CRISPR you will remove the need for environment damaging pesticides like Glyphosate and Dicamba.  I've talked with scientists inside the industry who have admitted that the way large corporations conduct business is the reason why there's been major issues here and the main problems have to do with their heavy handed approach and the overusage of these pesticides and these companies strong-arming regulatory agencies to let them get around safety limits like what's happened in California's Central Valley (where strawberries are produced and considered the single most pesticide doused fruit there is.)

CRISPR is direct gene editing technology so I would analogize it with immunological agents used to fight disease instead of antibiotics or chemotherapy.  You remove the "middle man" dangerous chemical agent so there are less impacts to the environment.

In general, organic soil no till farming is the best because it retains nutrients far better especially during runoff.  You can use GMO or CRISPR with that kind of farming, without using chemical fertilizers or pesticides.

 

[Juliancolton]

7 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

They cant solve climate change issues though, or biodiversity problems.

Why not? GMOs can markedly increase crop yields (not to mention increase their nutritional values), which necessarily reduces the amount of land clearing required to feed everybody. Land clearing is a huge facet of AGW and habitat destruction that's accelerating the Holocene extinction event.

[LibertyBell]

7 hours ago, JerseyWx said:

Well I encourage you to have a stay in North Korea for awhile and then get back to me on that point.

If we had another four years of this babboon in office, the US would become much like NK.

[LibertyBell]

3 minutes ago, Juliancolton said:

Why not? GMOs can markedly increase crop yields (not to mention increase their nutritional values), which necessarily reduces the amount of land clearing required to feed everybody. Land clearing is a huge facet of AGW and habitat destruction that's accelerating the Holocene extinction event.

We're not in the Holocene anymore though, we're in the Anthropocene since 1950

They can increase crop yields but we also need to keep population growth in check.  If you dont solve the root of the problem, no new technology will derail the eventual outcome.  Keeping world birth rates to around 1.8-2 per family is key as well as reducing the amount of land used for animal farming.  Most of the developed world is there, but the US is a bit higher than that and there are parts of the developing world that have a birth rate that's still way too high.  Income equality, better education and more opportunities will help greatly.

 

 

[LibertyBell]

Lots of hope with CRISPR not just with crops but also as a source for biofuels and applications in health too.

I sure hope this gets covered properly, and we can ease some regulations with gene editing technology so the small companies and universities and nonprofits can do more work, rather than this being an industry dominated by big biotech.

Regulations are necessary, but they need to be more efficient and worthwhile regulations, not the bloated inefficient regulations we have that stifle innovation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRISPR#Applications

By the end of 2014 some 1000 research papers had been published that mentioned CRISPR.^[148][149] The technology had been used to functionally inactivate genes in human cell lines and cells, to study Candida albicans, to modify yeasts used to make biofuels and to genetically modify crop strains.^[149] CRISPR can also be used to change mosquitos so they cannot transmit diseases such as malaria.^[150]

CRISPR-based re-evaluations of claims for gene-disease relationships have led to the discovery of potentially important anomalies.^[151]

[weatherpruf]

7 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

If we had another four years of this babboon in office, the US would become much like NK.

That was unfair to babboons.

[LibertyBell]

Just now, weatherpruf said:

That was unfair to babboons.

Lol I thought of that after I wrote it.  Behavior of other animals can't be judged the way human behavior is judged.

 

[Dan76]

Political shiz here  http://www.americanpol.com/index.php?/forum/3-political-roundtable/  thanks

[JerseyWx]

8 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

If we had another four years of this babboon in office, the US would become much like NK.

Lol, I hope you're kidding.  You do realize the atrocitites that "Rocket Man" is responsible for, right?

Anyway, I digress since this isn't the political forum.

[LibertyBell]

3 minutes ago, JerseyWx said:

Lol, I hope you're kidding.  You do realize the atrocitites that "Rocket Man" is responsible for, right?

Anyway, I digress since this isn't the political forum.

That's not my point- my point is that we now coddle him and the guy that's running Saudi Arabia.  They need to be called out for their genocidal behavior.  To not do that makes it complete hypocrisy to call out any other nations, which are nowhere near as bad as those two.

 

 

[BxEngine]

And now everyone knows why i didnt want the cc talk in here. Sigh. 

 

@Rjay you clean it up i give up.

[NycStormChaser]

[LibertyBell]

18 minutes ago, BxEngine said:

And now everyone knows why i didnt want the cc talk in here. Sigh. 

 

@Rjay you clean it up i give up.

It's actually a lot friendlier than what we see in the political forum lol.

This has been pretty cordial for the most part.

I mean we know NYers like us have a different definition for cordial but still lol.

 

[LibertyBell]

No one mentioned the supermoon tonight   It's the largest and brightest moon we will see until 2026.

 

[rclab]

8 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

No one mentioned the supermoon tonight   It's the largest and brightest moon we will see until 2026.

 

Actually a super moon is what this winter has done to us.  As always ....

[weatherpruf]

7 hours ago, BxEngine said:

And now everyone knows why i didnt want the cc talk in here. Sigh. 

 

@Rjay you clean it up i give up.

Bx, in this polarized age it is impossible. I can't even go for a morning walk in the mall without someone getting in my face to spout political talking points. Can't sit in a diner. I have been accosted by old timers swinging their canes at me in the supermarket.