Warbird Information Exchange

Global Warming is the biggest urban legend of all times! Contrary to what idiots like Al Gore say, there is not agreement concerning this subject from climatologists and other people who are pros!!

The main "experts" bemoaning global warming are low lifes like Gore, fat-ass Michael Moore and other such ilk.

Yes folks, the planet goes through temperature changes in cycles-----it is warmer some periods than other periods. Ice accumulation occurs some centuries and dissipates during other centuries.

Don't let the New York Times, Newsweek and Time Magazine do all your thinking for you-----some of these folks just might have an agenda to push----like their buddy----Al Bore!

I don't know about the whole globe getting warmer- But it is HOT here in Houston!

Tim

The question is not about natural fluctuations in planet temp..it is about how accelerated they are. Political crap and the fuc**ed up state of the planet should be in the 'off topic' forum in any case.

Dave

I'm not sure which is worse, global warming or another ice age. That's the choice fellas!

I did learn quite a bit regarding the snowfall and ice accumulation though. One question though, how is it that Kee Bird didn't end up buried? Seems to me that it was there for many years as well.

I looked like Key Bird was not on a Glacier but in a lake bed. I remember seeing the video when they landed in the mud with the C-7

Tim

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com

Hmm, maybe someone should look in the mirror and ask if all of their thinking has been just as driven by folks with an opposite agenda. I'm all for free speech but you are pretty bold to assume everyone would agree with your politics.

Agree with DaveM2, unless it is aircraft related-take such posts to the Off Topic forum.

So what sort of scientific background do you have to make such sweeping statements? Just because you don't agree with the politics of some of the people involved in publicizing the problem doesn't mean the problem isn't a very real issue. The overwhelming majority (98%) of scientists the world over do agree that man-made pollution is contributing to climate change. The only real debate is over how quickly the changes will take place. The ones that don't agree that global warming is an issue all have funding from sources which compromise their ethical positions, like the oil industry. Anyway this is hardly the place for this sort of discussion, but I just cannot let such ignorant statements pass. I have a very heavy background in science, with a PhD to back it up. I'd say that I'd prefer to let the evidence speak for itself, rather than ignorant, wishful thinking.

Choose to ignore what stares you in the face at your own peril.

At the very least, wouldn't you say hedging your bets and doing something to reduce pollution couldn't hurt? Cleaner air isn't a bad thing. Why get so worked up about doing something positive? Oh yeah, because Al Gore thinks it's a good idea, it must be really bad? So you'd rather have all that crap in your lungs just because, right? Sound idea, really sound idea. It really makes sense now. I can see the light!

Richard

You're absolutely right, let's keep this aviation related.

WE NEED TO SHUT DOWN ALL THESE POLLUTING WARBIRDS! Lets start a booth at Oshkosh.

Just kidding of course! It will be interesting tho if they actually do recover the remaining birds to see the actual depth. Nature is amazing!

regards,

t~

Sorry, I know this is off topic.

Without saying who is right or wrong about global warming, and leaving all politics aside, its important to remember that it is just a theory. A theory that has yet to be proven.

Some will say that there is plenty of evidence to support the theory, but still, no actual proof.

Yes, clean air is a good thing and pollution should be kept to a minimum.

But, saying that "98% of scientists now agree" is just meaningless. 98% of scientists probably know no more about global warming than you or I. For example, what would an astronomer or a particle physisist know about it?

I spoke to an ocean climatologist last year (a scientist who should actually know something about it) and the best he could give me was "nobody knows, but mankind is possibly not helping". Hardly damning evidence is it. I asked him about the so called mini ice ages in the middle ages. He said he hadn´t thought about that, but would maybe look into it. Hmmm... and these are the experts!

The short answer is no-one knows and IMHO there isn´t even enough information to make an educated guess.

Richard,

Sorry, everybody for another post on this subject, but I don't take kindly to being called "ignorant"-----several times---- regarding a subject that I AM well informed about.

There are several "facts" that you have stated that are totally false. Where did you get the "98% of the scientists believe in global warming"------ was your source The Earth Liberation Front, PETA, The New York Times, or some other wacko kooks. When you mention 98% of "scientists" believe in global warming and the damage it is doing, what do you mean by scientists-----chemists, M.D.'s, physicists, aeronautical engineers, nutritiionists, veterinarians, computer scientists or proctologists??

I have a college degree in Wildlife Biology/ Wildlife Management--------that makes me a "scientist" I guess, and I don't believe in the common theory of global warming.

The Kyoto Accord would do almost nothing to stop pollution in the biggest offending countries such as China and India. On the other hand it would severely punish countries that have good pollution control policies, such as the U.S. and Britain. What a joke!!

You need to get your info from legitimate sources, not from biased propagandists like the Society of Concerned Scientists who have an overt socialist agenda.

Sorry Tigercat, but I can't let that go. Perhaps we should take this off board, because it really does not belong here. All I can say is that your understanding of the subject is clearly pretty mediochre. You clearly do not understand the science, and have let politics interfere with logic.

My understandings come from decades of putting science into practice. I don't get my facts from PETA, ELF or other non-biased sources. I am not some lunatic fringe scientist. I use cold, hard, logic to make my decisions, based upon the scientific method, not my gut, or wishful thinking.

You will not find anyone of any credibility disputing that earth's climate has radically changed in the last century, especially in the last 30 years. 98% of climatologists agree with that.... this is not some arbitrary number. It's not even like this trend has been hidden. We have all experienced it. It hardly seems a year goes by when heat records are not broken around the globe, and at an ever-increasing rate. Surely you have to acknowledge this. This trend directly correlates with the rapid rise in man-made carbon dioxide emissions. This is not in dispute either.

To paraphrase the technical aspects of how carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere affect the earth's climate: Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere play a large role in governing how much energy from the sun is re-radiated back out into space, and this directly affects the earth's temperature.... this is an undisputed fact. Trees and other plant life breath in carbon dioxide and exhaust oxygen during daylight. They play a vital role in regulating the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere... you should already know this. Since the onset of the industrial revolution in about 1860 the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by about 30%, from about 280 ppm to 370 ppm (as of 2004)... (data from NOAA). This, coupled with substantial global deforestation in that same period of time, has led to a significant imbalance in the equation governing the temperature of earth's atmosphere. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the higher the levels of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere, the more solar energy is trapped within it, which conseqently leads to warming the earth's climate. And by the way, technically I am a rocket scientist, designing components for spacecraft systems. This is basic science; it's not just plucked out of thin air by some "socialist agenda".

The only dispute amongst climatologists is the rate of climate change, and how long it will be before we have a serious threat to our current way of life. You won't find a reputable climatologist anywhere who will dispute the basic concepts I have just laid out.

I have no agenda. I'm not some mindless tree-hugger. This should be a totally apolitical subject. You are right that Kyoto was totally unfair to developed countries... I never said that it wasn't, nor do I agree that it should be enforced the way it was. One of the few smart things that Bush did was not to sign it. However, it does not take away from the fact that climate change is a very real and serious threat, and we have done nothing in the last five years to address it. In fact, we have actively sought to worsten the issue by relaxing regulations on coal-burning power plants, not requiring higher mpg from the auto-industry and other such things. Why is that do you think? It's certainly not because it's good for us as a nation. It's because it's good for the wallets of a few political donors. Why would you support a few greedy CEO's when you have so much at stake in this? At the very least, it can't hurt to be more pro-active. What is the problem with being more careful with our environment.... no one wants to live in a sewer. Would you want to live next to a coal-powered power plant? I doubt it somehow.

Now let's get back to aviation... PLEASE!

Richard

sorry to bore you guys but just what is going on with this recovery effort? from the pics that i have seen of the b 17 that is down there it really looks like they are going to be bringing up a big flat can. any info on deterioration of metal under such conditions out there? other than crushing forces i mean. it is an ambitious project to say the least. i wonder if they will use the same method of recovery as before or possibly some new technology that will make the recovery of all the planes at once possible. are the planes close together still or have they been spread apart (no pun intended) over the years?? could a 400 foot deep hole the size of 2 football fields be excavated from ice?? many questions, to be sure, but just what do these folks have in mind??

Okay then, if you persist in this off-topic discussion, I must ask what is your legitimate source that refutes global warming? What data and evidence do they use to show their side?

You make this a political debate. Yet the few scientists that still question global warming all seem to be politically motivated conservatives. Whereas the rest of the scientific community that believes global warming is a mixture of moderates, liberals, and some conservatives. Don't try telling us that those scientists that don't believe in global warming aren't politicized while the majority who do believe in global warming are somehow embedded in the far left. It would appear your viewpoint is as politically tainted as the people you criticize.

If it makes any difference, I'm a geologist who has studied climatic changes. And yes, the earth does go through warming and cooling cycless. But those trends take thousands (or tens of thousands) of years to occur. We are currently in the most rapid warming period ever observed. We have seen warming in the last 100 years that is greater than what we should expect to see in 1000 years if this was a normal warming cycle. And the warming is only accelerating. Politicians don't need to tell me that. It's all in the data. And not data from one or two studies...but countless studies. And I'll believe the data before I believe any politician...whether that politician be Al Gore or George Bush.

If only one type of vehical can burn gasoline in 100 years, however, I think it should be warbirds. Perhaps we can all agree on that.

Hey guys-------lets get back on topic----------I should have known better than commenting on any subject that has political components. It just turns into a circular argument.

Lets talk about a subject we all have respect for---------warbirds!!

Thanks Tigercat, we can at least agree heartily on our love for vintage aviation.

All the best, Richard