|
|
Posts: 3779
| Curious about your thoughts, what will muskie fishing be like in the distant future? Like 100 and 500 years from now. What will be the most influential variables/trends between now and then? | |
| | |
Posts: 9
| Chat GPT will be dictating all of the bite windows. | |
| | |
| In 100 years, the biggest variable will be climate change. If temps warm too much, that would impact fishing. We booked a moose hunt this fall on the lower Yukon River in Alaska. The outfitter is a guy in his mid 70s and has been doing this for around 40 years and hunted the area for over 50 years. We had a conference call with him and when asking about weather, he said the temps have increased to the point that it seldom gets below freezing during the time we will be there, where 50 years ago it was common to wake up to skim ice on the sloughs. He also has to make arrangements to get meat out quicker because of the warmer weather. Not sure why, but Alaska has seen more temp change than most other areas.
He did say the time of the rut has not changed, that is apparently daylight length dependent, not temp.
500 years? | |
| | |
Posts: 8719
| Well, if we don't get our act together with the environment and climate change I don't expect there to be muskies in a lot of the places we fish in 100 years. In 500 years? Hard to say with any certainty but my the I suspect we will have caused our own extinction by then. Whatever is left after we are gone will probably fare pretty well. | |
| | |
Posts: 222
| You will have electronics to show you where every muskie is in the lake with it's length, girth and estimated weight. Heck that might be in 5-10 years the way things are going. | |
| | |
Posts: 1194
| My retirement funds will be gone, may need a second cataract surgery, shoulder surgery, and iron clad boat to ram the Wake boats. And to top it off Muskies will be extinct do to warming. | |
| | |
Posts: 2236
Location: SE, WI. | In 100 years every fish will be A silver musky loaded With Mercury Levels. If there’s 300,000 Variables in Musky Biometrics Now, probably 3 Zillion Variables in 500 years. Nobody will leave their house to fish, Everything will be “ WEE FISHING” …;) And Someone will catch a New World Record Daily! And I will Still Not Be Target Fishing:) … ….in 500 years, there will be No More Shoreline due to the Erosion of Shoreline by Wakeboats ;( JD
Edited by jdsplasher 5/3/2023 10:19 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | 100 years - not much difference. 500 years - there will be no intelligent life on the planet. | |
| | |
Posts: 1202
Location: Walker, MN | Due to fishing pressure, they will be the fish of 100,000 casts. | |
| | |
Posts: 607
Location: Bloomington, MN | The Billy Finn Bucktail, Robert's Mud Puppy, and the Burmek B-1 will be the go-to lures! | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | AI will have created perfect lakes and rivers that is if it doesn't figure out how to save us from ourselves. Electronics will be something we could not fathom, so will boats, their power and how we get from place to place. | |
| | |
Posts: 772
Location: Delavan, WI | Fishing will be banned by then, maybe even sooner than you think could only be 20 years away | |
| | |
Posts: 386
| We are a negative bunch...
So here we go
500 years from now:
We have terraformed Mars and are working on getting to Alpha Centauri. Since.there was no life on Mars when we began, we stock the new lakes and rivers with the best fish in each climate/biome. Also, we had already staked out where the best mineral deposits and farmland were before hand, so huge Planetary Parks exist where people can go to remove.themselves from urban sprawl and responsibly harvest as desired. Muskies and taimen flourish in the sub-arctic parks.
Also, Earth gets less crowded so less crowded here and less pollution. | |
| | |
Location: Athens, Ohio | Disney should have us animatronic fish by then to keep us amused, m | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Kirby Budrow - 5/3/2023 10:02 PM
100 years - not much difference. 500 years - there will be no intelligent life on the planet.
Agreed (to some extent). After Terminator and his outfit have cleansed us, they will come to the conclusion job done and time to turn themselves off and let the world regenerate. Some intelligent animals will still be hanging around...
| |
| | |
Posts: 1261
Location: Stevens Point, Wi. | I truly doubt I'll give a #*^@! | |
| | |
Location: PA Angler | Have to agree with some of the others. Climate change, electronics, and lures that swim by themselves. | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | FlyPiker - 5/4/2023 8:49 AM
We are a negative bunch...
So here we go
500 years from now:
We have terraformed Mars and are working on getting to Alpha Centauri. Since.there was no life on Mars when we began, we stock the new lakes and rivers with the best fish in each climate/biome. Also, we had already staked out where the best mineral deposits and farmland were before hand, so huge Planetary Parks exist where people can go to remove.themselves from urban sprawl and responsibly harvest as desired. Muskies and taimen flourish in the sub-arctic parks.
Also, Earth gets less crowded so less crowded here and less pollution.
Need some optimists, yes.
If we are going to space with biomes it is more likely to be "Silent Running" (1972).
Interesting how that generation of writers already predicting we were going to sh-t in our own bed, corporate greed over the wellbeing of the commons
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/4/2023 10:59 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1208
Location: E. Tenn | There will still be whining about "those muskies are eating all my walleyes".
Edited by miket55 5/4/2023 11:01 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 517
Location: WI | I doubt machines will musky fish. | |
| | |
Posts: 94
| All the muskies will be controlled by Immortan Joe. We shall fish to Valhalla, shiny and chrome. | |
| | |
| miket55 - 5/4/2023 10:58 AM
There will still be whining about "those muskies are eating all my walleyes".
Nope. By then warming waters will have eliminated walleye in the lower 48, so the whine will change to " the musky are eating all the bass". | |
| | |
Posts: 120
Location: Twin Cities Metro | In 100 years social norms will have changed a great deal regarding our relationship to nature. I would guess fishing and hunting will be very much out of fashion due to the broad recognition that animals are not so very different from people. At that point, muskies and their habitat will likely be thriving but people will not be interested in sticking hooks in their faces for sport. More likely they'll be interested in viewing them in their natural habitat like driving through Yellowstone to see bison.
In 500 years? How well do you think people of the 1500s could have predicted what people of the 2000s would be interested in, much less the health of a (then) treasured ecosystem? | |
| | |
Posts: 668
Location: mercer wi | They probably won't identify as muskies. And we'll all be dead. The human species will be gone because of our own Righteousness. | |
| | |
Posts: 8719
| Ranger, I think you'll see that kind of thinking go by the wayside sooner rather than later. The good old boys are pretty #*^@ old, and their younger supporters are pretty #*^@ dumb. In a generation or two there aren't gonna be enough rich old white guys to keep other rich old white guys in charge. | |
| | |
Posts: 1186
| All of our social shortcomings are secondary, or tertiary, The crux of the biscuit, as they say, is that their are way, way, way, too many people on the planet. We are outstripping our environment. We can't possibly maintain the current population, based on the current consumption of our resources. Add to that, the population is growing exponentially. If you know anything about zoology, whenever a species overpopulates their environment, and there is nothing to keep the population in check, there will be a major crash, in that population. There can be many ways that crash can manifest, but it will happen. The best we can do, with cooperation, is put off the inevitable. Could happen in less than a hundred years. Probably between a hundred and 500. In 500 years, if anyone is catching muskie, they are doing it for food.
Edited by TCESOX 5/8/2023 9:46 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1208
Location: E. Tenn | North of 8 - 5/4/2023 5:01 PM
miket55 - 5/4/2023 10:58 AM
There will still be whining about "those muskies are eating all my walleyes".
Nope. By then warming waters will have eliminated walleye in the lower 48, so the whine will change to " the musky are eating all the bass".
Down here they're already whining about the muskies eating all the crappies.. | |
| | |
Posts: 490
Location: NW WI | miket55 - 5/8/2023 10:20 PM
North of 8 - 5/4/2023 5:01 PM
miket55 - 5/4/2023 10:58 AM
There will still be whining about "those muskies are eating all my walleyes".
Nope. By then warming waters will have eliminated walleye in the lower 48, so the whine will change to " the musky are eating all the bass".
Down here they're already whining about the muskies eating all the crappies..
The analogy I use when I hear this is as such "The muskies are also the ones depleting the biosphere and picking apples off the apple tree". | |
| | |
Posts: 1194
| TCESOX - 5/8/2023 9:42 PM
All of our social shortcomings are secondary, or tertiary, The crux of the biscuit, as they say, is that their are way, way, way, too many people on the planet. We are outstripping our environment. We can't possibly maintain the current population, based on the current consumption of our resources. Add to that, the population is growing exponentially. If you know anything about zoology, whenever a species overpopulates their environment, and there is nothing to keep the population in check, there will be a major crash, in that population. There can be many ways that crash can manifest, but it will happen. The best we can do, with cooperation, is put off the inevitable. Could happen in less than a hundred years. Probably between a hundred and 500. In 500 years, if anyone is catching muskie, they are doing it for food.
Disease, food supply, and war are the ways our populations are keep in check.
With the amount of people on earth something going to give. (but give it will)
Way too many of us!
It's been said Earth will al way's be here but man will not. There have been like six mass die off's in the Earth's history. As far as Earth goes it will be gone in 4 1/2 billion years (along with Mercury, Venus, and Mars) when the Sun Expands. | |
| | |
| In the USA, we are seeing a decline in the average life expectancy. Short term, COVID had an impact but the life style of the average citizen has more impact long term. About 20 years ago I attended a Wellness seminar where the featured speaker said the nation was looking at an epidemic of Type II diabetes if we did not change our diet and exercise habits. He was right. For over 30 years I bought health insurance for my employer, along with senior management. Starting a little over 10 years ago, the number one drug being paid for was for diabetes. The agent said that was common among his many clients. The insurance provider said the same thing and offered a number of different incentives to participants if they would just get a wellness check, complete a health screen, etc. Didn't have much of an impact.
As a nation, our life choices are costing a fortune in medical costs and shorter life spans. Instead of the plague or some other health catastrophe, we will thin the herd
with sugar, greasy food and sitting on the couch. | |
| | |
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | North of 8 - 5/9/2023 9:52 AM
In the USA, we are seeing a decline in the average life expectancy. Short term, COVID had an impact but the life style of the average citizen has more impact long term. About 20 years ago I attended a Wellness seminar where the featured speaker said the nation was looking at an epidemic of Type II diabetes if we did not change our diet and exercise habits. He was right. For over 30 years I bought health insurance for my employer, along with senior management. Starting a little over 10 years ago, the number one drug being paid for was for diabetes. The agent said that was common among his many clients. The insurance provider said the same thing and offered a number of different incentives to participants if they would just get a wellness check, complete a health screen, etc. Didn't have much of an impact.
As a nation, our life choices are costing a fortune in medical costs and shorter life spans. Instead of the plague or some other health catastrophe, we will thin the herd
with sugar, greasy food and sitting on the couch.
Definitely true! Fortunately gym memberships and organic eating is on the rise but probably not enough yet. | |
| | |
Posts: 8719
| I was kind of shocked to find out that the military has fat camps for recruits... There were a handful of guys I knew when I was young enough to enlist who might have qualified for fat camp, maybe 2 or three. Today? Wow. | |
| | |
Posts: 596
Location: Duluth | the 15 years I've been musky fishing it has changed so dang much. As long as the type of people I meet in this sport doesn't change then I don't care where it heads honestly. I like catching trout more, certainly like the places trout fishing brings me more, but nothing compares to the people I have met musky fishing. | |
| | |
Posts: 105
| In 100 years I think muskie (and walleye and trout) populations will have shifted significantly further north than they are now. | |
| | |
| esoxaddict - 5/9/2023 11:51 AM
I was kind of shocked to find out that the military has fat camps for recruits... There were a handful of guys I knew when I was young enough to enlist who might have qualified for fat camp, maybe 2 or three. Today? Wow.
Back when I was in the Army and the draft was still in place, there were folks that deliberately ate their way out of the draft. It was rumored that the reason the GOP passed on former Mich. Governor John Engler for George W.'s VP was that he had a large, sudden weight gain when he graduated from college and lost his student deferment. We had a guy in my basic training company from the hills of Kentucky that tried to eat his way out of the draft but fell a couple pounds short. Basic was a living h*** for him. Then he tried to go AWOL and failed at that. His whole platoon was punished for not stopping him and his life got even worse. Then, because he couldn't pass the preliminary PT tests, he got rolled back three weeks. Another three weeks of basic. One of the guys in my platoon, also from Kentucky, worried that the guy might kill himself at the rifle range. | |
| | |
Posts: 490
Location: NW WI | North of 8 - 5/9/2023 3:48 PM
esoxaddict - 5/9/2023 11:51 AM
I was kind of shocked to find out that the military has fat camps for recruits... There were a handful of guys I knew when I was young enough to enlist who might have qualified for fat camp, maybe 2 or three. Today? Wow.
Back when I was in the Army and the draft was still in place, there were folks that deliberately ate their way out of the draft. It was rumored that the reason the GOP passed on former Mich. Governor John Engler for George W.'s VP was that he had a large, sudden weight gain when he graduated from college and lost his student deferment. We had a guy in my basic training company from the hills of Kentucky that tried to eat his way out of the draft but fell a couple pounds short. Basic was a living h*** for him. Then he tried to go AWOL and failed at that. His whole platoon was punished for not stopping him and his life got even worse. Then, because he couldn't pass the preliminary PT tests, he got rolled back three weeks. Another three weeks of basic. One of the guys in my platoon, also from Kentucky, worried that the guy might kill himself at the rifle range.
Was the Gentleman's name "Gomer Pyle"? | |
| | |
| 7.62xJay - 5/9/2023 6:40 PM
North of 8 - 5/9/2023 3:48 PM
esoxaddict - 5/9/2023 11:51 AM
I was kind of shocked to find out that the military has fat camps for recruits... There were a handful of guys I knew when I was young enough to enlist who might have qualified for fat camp, maybe 2 or three. Today? Wow.
Back when I was in the Army and the draft was still in place, there were folks that deliberately ate their way out of the draft. It was rumored that the reason the GOP passed on former Mich. Governor John Engler for George W.'s VP was that he had a large, sudden weight gain when he graduated from college and lost his student deferment. We had a guy in my basic training company from the hills of Kentucky that tried to eat his way out of the draft but fell a couple pounds short. Basic was a living h*** for him. Then he tried to go AWOL and failed at that. His whole platoon was punished for not stopping him and his life got even worse. Then, because he couldn't pass the preliminary PT tests, he got rolled back three weeks. Another three weeks of basic. One of the guys in my platoon, also from Kentucky, worried that the guy might kill himself at the rifle range.
Was the Gentleman's name "Gomer Pyle"?
No, Gomer was a brilliant athlete compared to this sad case. | |
| | |
Posts: 120
Location: Twin Cities Metro | TCESOX - 5/8/2023 3:42 PM
All of our social shortcomings are secondary, or tertiary, The crux of the biscuit, as they say, is that their are way, way, way, too many people on the planet. We are outstripping our environment. We can't possibly maintain the current population, based on the current consumption of our resources. Add to that, the population is growing exponentially. If you know anything about zoology, whenever a species overpopulates their environment, and there is nothing to keep the population in check, there will be a major crash, in that population. There can be many ways that crash can manifest, but it will happen. The best we can do, with cooperation, is put off the inevitable. Could happen in less than a hundred years. Probably between a hundred and 500. In 500 years, if anyone is catching muskie, they are doing it for food.
What resources do you think we're short of? Let's consider...
Food. We've got enough for everyone. Farmers are extremely efficient. The issue is the distribution system, but that's a problem that can be solved with sufficient will.
Water. Plenty of water overall. If freshwater is problematic, there's always desalinization of the oceans. Right now it would be very expensive because it takes a lot of resources to accomplish it compared to just pumping clear water out of the ground.
Energy. Every square meter of the Earth is receiving about 1.44 kW of power from the sun (a bed sheet is about two square meters of area). In fact, all fossil fuels are essentially stored solar energy (the ancient plants that make up most of the fossil fuels we drill/mine used energy from the sun to grow in the first place, after all). Wind is also solar in origin (what drives the motion of the atmosphere?). Nuclear and geothermal (which is also nuclear in origin since the Earth's internal temperature is maintained from radioactivity) are the few sources that are actually terrestrial in origin. Energy may be more expensive to produce in the future, but that is no lack of energy on or in our planet.
Technology and innovation tend to overcome limited resources. I'm sure the city managers of the 1890's were very concerned about how to deal with the horse poop that was piling up in urban areas from people traveling around in buggies drawn by horses. Then the automobile arrived along with mass transit (the London Underground was opened in the 1860's and was electrified by the 1890's) and the horse poop problem disappeared overnight. Very quickly, the need for resources like horse forage and people to sweep streets clean of horse poop were replaced by the need for smooth roads and petroleum to fuel the automobiles.
We see the same thing happening now. The power plants of more advanced automobiles require things like lithium, cobalt, nickel, and manganese rather than gasoline. And once those resources become more scarce, a market will be created for recycling those resources (which don't just burn up with the remnants ending up in the atmosphere like petroleum products). And we'll likely be on to something better soon after.
So in the end, it is our ability to innovate that will make these more basic resources needs secondary (or even tertiary). Since innovation tends to arise and thrive where societies are free/open and educational systems are good, I think our basic social shortcomings are front and center. Not least because it is really hard to turn the ship once a society gets off track; trust can take generations to build while taking only a few years to wreck. We really are all in this together, and I think we ought to act like it.
Cheers!
Edited by RobertK 5/10/2023 3:19 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1186
| RobertK - 5/10/2023 3:14 PM
TCESOX - 5/8/2023 3:42 PM
All of our social shortcomings are secondary, or tertiary, The crux of the biscuit, as they say, is that their are way, way, way, too many people on the planet. We are outstripping our environment. We can't possibly maintain the current population, based on the current consumption of our resources. Add to that, the population is growing exponentially. If you know anything about zoology, whenever a species overpopulates their environment, and there is nothing to keep the population in check, there will be a major crash, in that population. There can be many ways that crash can manifest, but it will happen. The best we can do, with cooperation, is put off the inevitable. Could happen in less than a hundred years. Probably between a hundred and 500. In 500 years, if anyone is catching muskie, they are doing it for food.
What resources do you think we're short of? Let's consider...
Food. We've got enough for everyone. Farmers are extremely efficient. The issue is the distribution system, but that's a problem that can be solved with sufficient will.
Water. Plenty of water overall. If freshwater is problematic, there's always desalinization of the oceans. Right now it would be very expensive because it takes a lot of resources to accomplish it compared to just pumping clear water out of the ground.
Energy. Every square meter of the Earth is receiving about 1.44 kW of power from the sun (a bed sheet is about two square meters of area ). In fact, all fossil fuels are essentially stored solar energy (the ancient plants that make up most of the fossil fuels we drill/mine used energy from the sun to grow in the first place, after all ). Wind is also solar in origin (what drives the motion of the atmosphere? ). Nuclear and geothermal (which is also nuclear in origin since the Earth's internal temperature is maintained from radioactivity ) are the few sources that are actually terrestrial in origin. Energy may be more expensive to produce in the future, but that is no lack of energy on or in our planet.
Technology and innovation tend to overcome limited resources. I'm sure the city managers of the 1890's were very concerned about how to deal with the horse poop that was piling up in urban areas from people traveling around in buggies drawn by horses. Then the automobile arrived along with mass transit (the London Underground was opened in the 1860's and was electrified by the 1890's ) and the horse poop problem disappeared overnight. Very quickly, the need for resources like horse forage and people to sweep streets clean of horse poop were replaced by the need for smooth roads and petroleum to fuel the automobiles.
We see the same thing happening now. The power plants of more advanced automobiles require things like lithium, cobalt, nickel, and manganese rather than gasoline. And once those resources become more scarce, a market will be created for recycling those resources (which don't just burn up with the remnants ending up in the atmosphere like petroleum products ). And we'll likely be on to something better soon after.
So in the end, it is our ability to innovate that will make these more basic resources needs secondary (or even tertiary ). Since innovation tends to arise and thrive where societies are free/open and educational systems are good, I think our basic social shortcomings are front and center. Not least because it is really hard to turn the ship once a society gets off track; trust can take generations to build while taking only a few years to wreck. We really are all in this together, and I think we ought to act like it.
Cheers!
Personally, I am taking your approach. I want to live positively. Why be miserable about something you have very little control over. The good won't come, if we don't live like we expect it. However, if I were a betting man, I would put my money the other way, due to our inability to cooperate, thus hindering the much needed technological advancements, without which, we will outstrip our resources, and ruin our own environment. | |
| | |
Posts: 734
| North of 8, have you seen the movie Full Metal Jacket? Stanley Kubrik classic. Jelly donut, that's your guy from Kentucky. Kdawg | |
| | |
| kdawg - 5/10/2023 4:59 PM
North of 8, have you seen the movie Full Metal Jacket? Stanley Kubrik classic. Jelly donut, that's your guy from Kentucky. Kdawg
Yes, I have seen the movie and this guy was in far worse shape and dumber than a box of rocks besides. He could not do one good form push up and when he tried to do pushups in front of the company, the Senior DI said it looked like he was humping a pumpkin and by gosh, it did. | |
| | |
Posts: 3779
| "So in the end, it is our ability to innovate that will make these more basic resources needs secondary (or even tertiary). Since innovation tends to arise and thrive where societies are free/open and educational systems are good, I think our basic social shortcomings are front and center. Not least because it is really hard to turn the ship once a society gets off track; trust can take generations to build while taking only a few years to wreck. We really are all in this together, and I think we ought to act like it."
And the politicians throwing stones
So the kids, they dance, they shake their bones
'Cause it's all too clear we're on our own
Singing ashes, ashes, all fall down
Ashes, ashes all fall down*
A Bobby Song
*a reference to the firebombing and resulting firestorm, by allied forces, of Dresden Germany, 2/13-15/1945, that killed 25,000, mostly civilians including POWs. | |
| | |
Posts: 1208
Location: E. Tenn | North of 8 - 5/10/2023 7:10 PM
kdawg - 5/10/2023 4:59 PM
North of 8, have you seen the movie Full Metal Jacket? Stanley Kubrik classic. Jelly donut, that's your guy from Kentucky. Kdawg
Yes, I have seen the movie and this guy was in far worse shape and dumber than a box of rocks besides. He could not do one good form push up and when he tried to do pushups in front of the company, the Senior DI said it looked like he was humping a pumpkin and by gosh, it did.
That guy was given the nickname "Private Pyle", by Gny. Sgt. Hartman.. | |
| | |
Posts: 1194
| A few things here
1.There are people who think global is a hoax.
We have to see the problem then take the steps to fix it. (just a few short years ago if we brought up "global warming" we would be friendless, tared and feathered and banned for life.
2. This is a complexed problem with no easy fix. And I hate to say it but by the time we have a solution it may be too late.
We going to this and that by 2050, The Cow out of the barn and little late to shut the door.
We owe it to the next generations of people to keep trying but too little too late. I hope I'm wrong!
| |
| | |
Posts: 43
| There seems to be a lot of belief in global warming, now I'm sure everyone here is well intentioned, but what is being pushed is a hoax. The hoax is that we are responsible for the planet heating up. I will admit the planet has warmed a little recently, but its part of the natural cycle, holocene temperatures have been far higher in the past than they are now, and muskies are still around, and regardless of what the "experts" say, they have no real idea what is going to happen in the future.
Tim | |
| | |
Posts: 59
| walleyejoe - 5/11/2023 9:04 PM
There seems to be a lot of belief in global warming, now I'm sure everyone here is well intentioned, but what is being pushed is a hoax. The hoax is that we are responsible for the planet heating up. I will admit the planet has warmed a little recently, but its part of the natural cycle, holocene temperatures have been far higher in the past than they are now, and muskies are still around, and regardless of what the "experts" say, they have no real idea what is going to happen in the future.
Tim
While muskies have been around, and will stay around despite increasing temperatures its important to get the facts straight regarding the climate. We can use geology with some math, chemistry,, and physics to understand how the climate has changed, and how it will change in the future:
1. Yes, temperatures during the holocene have been higher, and part of a cycle. The holocene climactic optimum was most likely a result of a feedback between glacial ice loss and milankovich cycles (orbital cycle involving Earth's tilt amongst other things). However, the Earth's current position in the milankovich cycle should be bringing us toward colder global temperatures, yet we are consistently recording the opposite case (annual temperatures increasing).
2. The only time in Earth's history that has seen a climate change like the current climate change was the Paleocene - Eocene thermal maximum (PETM). During the PETM global temperatures increased 5 - 8 degrees celcius, and this change occurred over a minimum of 20,000 years likely as a result of massive volcanic eruptions and positive feedback loops. Our current climate change is expected to reach 8 degrees celcius within 200 years under a business as usual emissions scenario, with no volcanic eruptions at a scale necessary for this rapid warming (see point 3).
3. If you look at all possible environmental inputs for global temperatures the only leading cause of the current temperature anomalies are anthropogenic greenhouse gasses. Historical solar irradiance variations are not large to impact temperatures nor are recent historic changes in volcanic gas emissions. Simply, the massive amount of greenhouse gasses emitted by human causes and the physics of how these greenhouse gasses trap heat are to blame.
4. Climate modeling is not weather modeling. Climate models are very robust, and while they cannot account for every physical phenomena in the atmosphere they do a good enough job to pick out general climate patterns to make conclusions. These climate models don't look at atmospheric conditions at a daily or even monthly resolution, rather, these models look at seasonal conditions. These climate models are verified by inputting data from decades ago and running them into the future to see what the model output is (ie. Data from 1950 used to predict 2023). The verification process finds that while models differ in exact solutions, they usually converge on a general solution. These models universally agree that the future of our climate is warmer conditions.
5. We can look at oxygen isotope excursions to understand the temperatures of regions on Earth in the past under different known atmospheric conditions (pretty cool ice core stuff with ancient air bubbles from Greenland, Antarctica, and other places). We can conpare this information against our current atmosphere to see how temperatures will change in the future under changing ammounts of greenhouse gasses.
6. Lots more evidence. I can send you articles (not created by a generative AI bot) if you wish.
Really, pretty much all the evidence for human caused climate change is the result from some basic science and applying common sense to the results. Most of the small percentage of scientists that don't agree with the climate change consensus have been found time and again to be funded by special interests groups whose continued existence relies on a false narrative that climate change is a hoax, or not a problem. To these groups, the actions necessary to halt climate change would put an existential threat on their bottom line. These groups often use the same marketing and litigation tactics employed by the tobacco companies back in the day when that industry was threatened (don't disprove the expert, just cause the public to doubt the expert). Unfortunately, this tactic has proven to work so well that climate change has become a heated political topic. While the solutions to mitigate the effects of climate change may very well be political, the existence and cause of climate change should be no more political than the mosquitos at the boat ramp.
- Quaternary geologist and one of the "experts"
Edited for clarity
Edited by Rob C 5/12/2023 12:07 AM
| |
| | |
| "Scientists working for Exxon between 1977 and 2003 accurately forecasted the rate at which global average temperatures would rise as a result of carbon emissions, correctly predicted that human-caused global warming would first be detectable by around 2000 and reasonably estimated how much carbon dioxide would lead to dangerous warming, according to the study."
Exxon disagrees with you Walleyejoe. | |
| | |
Posts: 43
| Well, maybe you can answer some questions.
1) CO2 levels are supposed to have risen from around 300 PPM to 420PPM in the last 170 or so years. According to the IPCC (definitely not interest group funded) CO2 in the atmosphere comes from 3 sources - the oceans, continental land masses, and humanity. Humanities contribution to atmospheric CO2 is between 3 and 5 percent of the total. Removing our 6 PPM contribution to the 120PPM increase would drop the current CO2 level to 414 PPM. How is that even meaningful? 95% of the increase is happening without us, and is going to continue, even if our contribution drops to zero.
2) You mentioned Greenland ice cores, I've included a graph of holocene temperature records from those ice cores, the idea that what we're seeing now is unprecedented, well, does it look unprecedented?
3) Looking at possible causes for today's temp rise, you say that greenhouse gases are the only viable reason. I've included a graph of holocene greenhouse gases and temperatures, the history doesn't back that up. Is today's convergence truly cause and effect or a coincidence?
4) Is the current temp rise truly legitimate? For example, a lot of US weather recording stations do not appear to be code. Another problem is NOAA "adjusting" historical temperatures down, and how many recent US Climatology Network station reportings are missing and just filled in with estimated (always higher) readings? There's also the University of Alabama Huntsville, which tracks global weather using satellites, no adjustments or estimates, no iffy weather stations. They have been tracking temps since 1978, and if I've got it right, they show a warming trend less than half what the IPCC claims, also their latest report shows that there has been no warming for the the past 8 years and 11 months.
5) We just came out of the Little Ice Age, how did CO2 cause that? And if you ignored that anomoly, what would our current rate of temp rise look like?
Is the planet truly warming? Maybe, but it's not like it hasn't happened before, and it's a little too convenient to say it's all our fault and we can fix it, but, we'll have to destroy western civilization in the process, sorry. You're skeptical of the deniers, OK, maybe some of that is legitimate, but do you think maybe I'm justified in skepticism of the promoters? Climategate? Michael Mann refusing to share the date used in the creation of his "hockey stick"? I'm sorry, I think too many people are pretending to have solutions to problems they have made up.
Tim
Attachments
----------------
 co2 data.png (52KB - 34 downloads)
holocene temp.jpg (41KB - 27 downloads)
holocene co2.png (68KB - 27 downloads)
| |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | **
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/13/2023 3:50 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Hoax - says the frog as it sits in a pot of water rising to a boil.
The healthy "living' earth itself DID have an ability to recover some of the gases with forests (esp rain forests), deep-rooted tall grass prairies, savannahs, healthy oceans, lakes, marshes, deltas and rivers with normal ecosystems, and of particular significance peat moss bogs, muskegs and permafrost tundra. We have f-d up a lot of that by draining, channeling, damming, dredging, harvesting, cutting and cultivating. A few more degrees and the muskegs and peat moss will dry up, and permafrost will melt and drain - then a lot of those carbon and nitrogen sinks that were fireproof, fire retardant or locked up in ice will be released into the atmosphere or go up in smoke - when they do, life will go on, but civilization that we are accustomed to won't after that.
Won't be 500 years before this happens, may even be less than 100 years. Up here every year we have massive unprecedented fires. Right now Alberta (again). A lot to do with the mountain pine beetle killing trees and creating fuel for these massive fires - was too cold for it up here at one time with the length of winter - not anymore.
Muskies can pretty well go where they want north or west now - if not for pike being in their way.
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/13/2023 4:16 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 3779
| "..... it's a little too convenient to say it's all our fault and we can fix it, but, we'll have to destroy western civilization in the process, sorry."
Nobody is saying "its all our fault". Nobody is saying "we can fix it". And no****ingbody except far-right idiots are saying (mostly to each other) that we'll "destroy western civilization in the process" of trying to reduce pollution to slow the rate of increase in global temperatures.
In cosmic time people have been on this planet for half-way thru a wink. Our species will be extinct by the time the wink is complete. The thousands of various religions offer no solution, yours included. Those are just myths, good stories that offer some hope and terrific opportunities to fleece ignorant people of their wealth.
People have an opportunity to use our smarts/technology to base decisions on the value of being a steward of the environment within which we live. But too many people are "willfully ignorant"; they've been convinced to ignore truth and support "alternative facts". Many far extreme Trumpers believe subterrain reptile aliens travel the globe in tunnels and Joe Biden is an alien who eats babies. Who is selling these ideas to these stupid people and why? | |
| | |
Posts: 43
| Sooooo, no reply to any of my questions, just a rant about "far right idiots", the obligatory MAGA/Trump reference and a shot at religion. That's quite the convincing argument, lefties really know how to engage people.
Well, I suppose I should have known better than to expect an intelligent discussion, so we'll just leave it at that.
Tim | |
| | |
Posts: 3779
| "Far right idiots" IS the answer to your questions. And I'm no "leftie"; I'm a responsible citizen of the universe and I behave accordingly. It's just fine that you don't understand.
Edited by Ranger 5/13/2023 7:36 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 59
| walleyejoe - 5/13/2023 12:02 PM
Well, maybe you can answer some questions.
...
Tim
My attempt at an intelligent discussion:
1. I can't seem to find the IPCC source for this figure, so if you could please provide this to me I would appreciate it. My first thought on this is that natural carbon sinks can remove approximately the same amount of carbon that is released into the atmosphere. If humans are emitting more carbon than these sinks can remove then that is how the greenhouse gas concentration is increasing at an unsustainable rate.
2. The graph is not clear what unit temperature is measured in. This is a small nit-picky thing, but anyone can make a graph to say anything. The graph is "professional" looking on the surface, it looks like this graph was completed hastily and intentionally made misleading making it not trustworthy. If you can send me the original article this graph was created for I will take a look at it. If I see that I am mistaken with my comment here then I will let you know.
3. The holocene temperature conundrum was solved in 2021. The paper authored by Bova et al and published in the Journal Nature titled "Seasonal origin of the thermal maxima at the Holocene and the last interglacial" describes their finding in the abstract. You can look this up if you choose.
4. Only the last 50 - 60 years of temperature data followed along with geochemical data is needed to find that the climate is warming. Even without raw temperature data we can just use geochemistry to calculate temperatures. You can also use pollen analysis amongst other things to see how vegetation changes are occurring due to warming. As for the IPCC vs. UA Huntsville part I don't see the data you cite. Rather, the temperature data published by UA Huntsville shows that temperatures have increased every year since 2015. It gets a bit more complicated when you look further back in the data, and I don't have a clear cut answer for you as to why their data shows this.
5. Plenty of plausible reasons for coming out of the Little Ice Age. A simple wikipedia search on this ice age gives you plenty of these reasons. Some of these things are due to climate variation, but other things are anthropogenic.
The planet is warming, and yes it has happened before. Unfortunately, we may not be able to fix climate change depending upon if any unseen climate feedback loops have been initiated. We don't need to destroy western civilization to combat climate change, and in fact, I see it as a major opportunity for economic expansion; and no, petroleum products won't disappear since there are uses for it besides energy production. Climategate has been beaten to death, and many independent investigations of it have found there was no scientific misconduct or fraud. A few of these independent investigations have a serious interest in getting to the bottom of problems like climategate since they give out big money to researchers. If a researcher has been found to fake their results then it is in the interest of the investigators to get that money back since they are publicly funded. Michael Mann should follow open science initiatives and release all information about his graph if he has not done so. However, many scientists have replicated his results and published their data openly online for everyone to check out.
I think that yes, you should be skeptical of some of the promoters. One of my personal pet peeves is when researchers use the RCP 8.5 results for climate forecasts when communicating with the public. The RCP 8.5 is the climate model that uses the worst case greenhouse gas emissions scenario. The reality of climate change is that we will most likely see intermediate or "low level" climate change. Many of these same people exaggerate the effects of climate change, with some of these people even saying "We are destroying the Earth". The Earth has been around for 4.6 billion years and will be around for billions more. Pretty much anything humans have done so far and will be able to do in the near future are but a mere annoyance to the Earth, but I doubt the Earth can actually feel an annoyance or anything at all for that matter.
One last thing to add: Just because one person/group publishes some data and research results does not make the data and results correct. The data needs to be verified and the results replicated before any big conclusions are made. This goes for people both pushing climate change and those that deny its existence. I have seen claims from both groups that make me skeptical.
Edited by Rob C 5/13/2023 11:40 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 8719
| The bottom line with all of it is that we don't know how much CO2 and methane we can pump into the atmosphere before we reach the point of no return. We can move, we can adapt to warmer temperatures, rising seas, whatever you can think of. What we can't do is predict how a changing climate or pollution might cause the extinction of some microscopic organism that forms the basis of the food chain. We can't predict what man made changes in nature might offset the balance of what eats what that eats the things that eat what we feed our food. Yes, there is plenty of water, and we have ways to treat it to make it potable and (relatively) safe. But you're drinking birth control pills and eating plastic and PCBs and mercury and a host of other crap every day. One thing we've learned from history is that humans do have the power to wreck the environment, and to try to repair the damage. Best bet is to try not to wreck it in the first place so you don't have to clean it up after the river catches on fire. AGAIN. | |
| | |
Posts: 43
| Thanks for your reply. In response to the IPCC, I was unable to find their CO2 emission estimates, but I know it was buried in a 2019 report they published. The graph from UAH I inserted at the bottom of the page.
Now, you seem to be a smart guy, probably smarter than me. You know how this works, you respond to my questions with papers and graphs that support your point, and then I do the same, back and forth to no end. And honestly, long drawn out discussions are hard for me. But I will respond to one point you made.
You said the "holocene temp conundrum" was solved. Maybe I wasn't clear, my contention was that CO2 wasn't controlling the temp during the holocene the way the promoters say it does. The graph shows high temps and very low CO2 levels. Their point is that the warm periods in the graph below didn't exist, that it was actually colder then than it is now.
Like I said, you seem pretty intelligent, and you said you have skepticism of both sides, but you're not even a little skeptical of that paper?
1) You're not even a little curious why they ignored all available holocene temp proxies and traveled to Papua to dig up a core sample that showed no warming?
How many ice core samples showing warming did they disregard? Is that good science?
2) You don't find it suspicious that their sample came from an area right next to the equator, an area free from seasonal temp swings, remaining tropical even during glaciations?
I included some pictures below, I don't know how to post links, but if you'd like, I can give you addresses, though they should be easy to google up. The beetles were found in a bog in the UK, they are oak capricorn beetles, currently extinct in the UK because it is too cold for them. They were dated to 3750 years old, when it was colder, Live Science 2021. The other picture is self explanatory, Vikings growning barley, 1000 years ago, where it's too cold to grow barley today. No picture, but Independent.co.uk, a planet saving website, had an article 9/29/20 about a penguin graveyard. Adelie penguins, which can't currently live in the antarctic due to the climate being too cold, apparently had a colony on the Scott coast, between 800 and 5000 years ago. When it was supposed to be colder. Since the glaciers have retreated lately, lots of things have been uncovered that have been dated to the "cold holocene" period, stumps of trees, evidence of mining and agriculture, none of which could have happened if the climate was as cold as Bova and Rosenthal say.
And then you have all the temperature proxies showing a very warm early holocene.
So, if temperatures were really that warm, and CO2 levels were that low, where does that leave the theory that CO2 is the climate thermostat? Can you ignore all the contrary temperature proxies, and physical evidence above, in favor of one dubious sediment core sample?
One other thing, whenever a scientist questions the climate narrative, they're always on the fossil fuel payroll. How many truckloads of money have the US and Europe dumped, and plan on dumping, into green initiatives and industries, and the scientists that produce research supporting it? Remember Solyndra?
I hope the day finds you well and this gives you something to think about.
Tim
Some of the pictures I added aren't showing, I don't know what the problem is.
Edited by walleyejoe 5/14/2023 5:06 PM
(ax_beetles_for_upload.jpg.thumb.1160.1160.jpg)
(c3headlines_Greenland_GISP2_ice_core_last_5K_years_Alley2000_6a010536b58035970c01310f4ff7a6970c_annot1.png)
Attachments
----------------
ax_beetles_for_upload.jpg.thumb.1160.1160.jpg (88KB - 27 downloads)
c3headlines_Greenland_GISP2_ice_core_last_5K_years_Alley2000_6a010536b58035970c01310f4ff7a6970c_annot1.png (186KB - 26 downloads)
tree-stump-climate-1612145775.4164 (1).webp (115KB - 29 downloads)
image-16 (1).webp (69KB - 29 downloads)
| |
| | |
Posts: 1208
Location: E. Tenn | I move this thread be relegated to "The Basement"..
| |
| | |
Posts: 1186
| I appreciate the scientific part of this discussion, being in General. The rest is more basementy. | |
| | |
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | UFFF!!! All these lists and graphs you guys are putting out are assuming the "scientists" know what they are doing. They don't. They're grad students, professors, interns collecting the data. I was one of them. The data is always manipulated to make it show what they want it to show and there are mistakes and intentional mistakes in collecting data. I know this from experience. All of it is BS. You read it in the news, or maybe even a real scientific journal and take it for fact but it is not. There is human error and assumptions that factor into. Some of is intentional, a lot of it is laziness of the intern collecting data., some of it is accidental. But it all skews the data. | |
| | |
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | So does politics. Apparently, a reminder is needed we don't do politics here. Social media, which this is in a literal sense, has already done enough damage. | |
| | |
Posts: 300
| Kirby Budrow - 5/15/2023 9:19 AM
UFFF!!! All these lists and graphs you guys are putting out are assuming the "scientists" know what they are doing. They don't. They're grad students, professors, interns collecting the data. I was one of them. The data is always manipulated to make it show what they want it to show and there are mistakes and intentional mistakes in collecting data. I know this from experience. All of it is BS. You read it in the news, or maybe even a real scientific journal and take it for fact but it is not. There is human error and assumptions that factor into. Some of is intentional, a lot of it is laziness of the intern collecting data., some of it is accidental. But it all skews the data.
Exactly right. Takes a lot of arrogance for somebody to think they have everything figured out because of "data" we have really only collected in the last 100 years. Probably not even that. | |
| | |
| Walleyejoe - Its a waste of time engaging with the extreme left. They don't believe anything unless its come from their extreme left echo chamber. The basement forum here is a prime example. | |
| | |
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | jvlast15 - 5/15/2023 9:29 AM
Kirby Budrow - 5/15/2023 9:19 AM
UFFF!!! All these lists and graphs you guys are putting out are assuming the "scientists" know what they are doing. They don't. They're grad students, professors, interns collecting the data. I was one of them. The data is always manipulated to make it show what they want it to show and there are mistakes and intentional mistakes in collecting data. I know this from experience. All of it is BS. You read it in the news, or maybe even a real scientific journal and take it for fact but it is not. There is human error and assumptions that factor into. Some of is intentional, a lot of it is laziness of the intern collecting data., some of it is accidental. But it all skews the data.
Exactly right. Takes a lot of arrogance for somebody to think they have everything figured out because of "data" we have really only collected in the last 100 years. Probably not even that.
Follow the money. These "scientists" will lose their jobs if they don't make up some crazy idea for a study. The hot topic is climate change. Tie any study to climate change and they have their money. Doesn't matter if it's legit or not.
Edited by Kirby Budrow 5/15/2023 10:06 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | wisskie - 5/15/2023 9:56 AM
Walleyejoe - Its a waste of time engaging with the extreme left. They don't believe anything unless its come from their extreme left echo chamber. The basement forum here is a prime example.
Or those extremists who only believe what they want from the extreme right echo chamber.
Edited by ToddM 5/17/2023 3:35 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | ToddM - 5/17/2023 3:34 AM
wisskie - 5/15/2023 9:56 AM
Walleyejoe - Its a waste of time engaging with the extreme left. They don't believe anything unless its come from their extreme left echo chamber. The basement forum here is a prime example.
Or those extremists who only believe what they want from the extreme right echo chamber.
And then there's the smart ones who realize it's all BS | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | Kirby Budrow - 5/17/2023 12:05 PM
ToddM - 5/17/2023 3:34 AM
wisskie - 5/15/2023 9:56 AM
Walleyejoe - Its a waste of time engaging with the extreme left. They don't believe anything unless its come from their extreme left echo chamber. The basement forum here is a prime example.
Or those extremists who only believe what they want from the extreme right echo chamber.
And then there's the smart ones who realize it's all BS
Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! | |
| | |
Posts: 1759
Location: new richmond, wi. & isle, mn | https://youtu.be/7W33HRc1A6c | |
| | |
Posts: 479
Location: Northern Illinois |
Kind of funny but, George Carlin died in 2008 before we had so much more compelling evidence about the effects of human activity. Also, Carlin gave up on humanity if you listen to interviews he gave. It's interesting that some people have resurrected these comedy bits to form a foundation for a line of thinking contrary to accepted modern scientific reasoning. | |
| | |
Posts: 8719
| He was right. The planet will be just fine. Everything we've polluted it with was here to begin with. What most of us are concerned with is damaging it to the point where it becomes difficult for us to survive on it. And while few will admit it, that includes not having to give up the lifestyle we enjoy. | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il |
I doubt you'd like to hear what he'd have to say now. Both sides wouldn't. | |
| | |
Posts: 1759
Location: new richmond, wi. & isle, mn | Au contraire Todd. I'd love to hear what he'd have to say. His stand up act could be a week long with all the material today's Snowflakes are generating. That's Snowflakes from both sides of the fence.
RIP George.
| |
| | |
| Why do you folks think people will still be here in 100 years? I am not confident of that. Putin, if things continue as they are could create nuclear winter as his final act. | |
| | |
Posts: 1186
| North of 8 - 5/18/2023 7:30 PM
Why do you folks think people will still be here in 100 years? I am not confident of that. Putin, if things continue as they are could create nuclear winter as his final act.
When a species overpopulates their environment, there is always a population crash. Several things can cause that crash. Famine, disease, drought, etc. With humans, you can throw in nuclear holocaust. We would probably adapt better to climate change, than many of the other possible outcomes. I think there's a pretty good chance something else gets us before climate change. | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | North of 8 - 5/18/2023 7:30 PM
Why do you folks think people will still be here in 100 years? I am not confident of that. Putin, if things continue as they are could create nuclear winter as his final act.
He does have children so.maybe there is a limit to his power lust. | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | jchiggins - 5/18/2023 6:51 PM
Au contraire Todd. I'd love to hear what he'd have to say. His stand up act could be a week long with all the material today's Snowflakes are generating. That's Snowflakes from both sides of the fence.
RIP George.
Exactly and I would want to hear it too. | |
| | |
Posts: 8719
| North of 8 - 5/18/2023 7:30 PM
Why do you folks think people will still be here in 100 years? I am not confident of that. Putin, if things continue as they are could create nuclear winter as his final act.
Pretty sure there will still be some. Probably not nearly as many as there are now. | |
| | |
Posts: 1194
| The famous blue skies of Colorado are filled with smoke from the fires burning in Canada and it's only May! Three summers in a row now! Two summers ago it was all summer long. Already a week of this crap. | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | chuckski - 5/24/2023 10:01 AM
The famous blue skies of Colorado are filled with smoke from the fires burning in Canada and it's only May! Three summers in a row now! Two summers ago it was all summer long. Already a week of this crap.
I'll see if i.can find some pictures. Air quality from the front range east is a big issue with fire smoke and dirt in the air from wind and drought.
(photo_1684953186656.jpg)
(photo_1684953137292.jpg)
(photo_1684953026445.jpg)
(photo_1684952994257.jpg)
(photo_1684952953655.jpg)
(photo_1684952922386.jpg)
(photo_1684952830944.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
photo_1684953186656.jpg (99KB - 25 downloads)
photo_1684953137292.jpg (150KB - 25 downloads)
photo_1684953026445.jpg (189KB - 24 downloads)
photo_1684952994257.jpg (128KB - 24 downloads)
photo_1684952953655.jpg (144KB - 25 downloads)
photo_1684952922386.jpg (85KB - 26 downloads)
photo_1684952830944.jpg (101KB - 24 downloads)
| |
| | |
Posts: 3779
| So, you guys in muskie clubs, do you discuss the fate of muskie fishing? Are long term prospects ever on the agenda? If not, why not?
Organized stakeholders have the loudest voice. Tho sometimes it's hard to be heard over the softer voices of profit takers. Those soft voices, the guys in the shadows who pay politicians to sacrifice environmental health and long-term community prosperity to protect revenue streams, they are very effective. | |
| | |
Posts: 322
| In 100 years musky fishing will be non existent due to leaking retired solar panel chemical contamination into our local waterways along with massive heavy metal contamination from the so called green electric movement. Acid extraction of base materials to remove rare earth metals will be discharged into waterways at an agreed upon rate by the EPA and WHO along with whatever chemicals DuPont magically manuafacturers under the radar. Oh wait all this stuff is happening today…….. Massive governement expansion will eventually tax us to death in the name of conservation with the best case scenario of the chance to possibly draw a tag/permit for musky like trying to draw a goat tag 40 year wait times. Only the elite will have access and will be able to afford the red tape and fish the most exclusive locations that are still left viable. The future looks bleak fishing or any sort of fish consumption in the near future. Look up some of the DNR consumption recommendations 4 oz of fish 1 time a week. This is my prediction for 2084.
Edited by muskymandan 5/31/2023 4:21 PM
| |
| | |
| Hmm. Well, just read about a hundred million dollar yacht being built that will be powered by three hydrogen motors. Top speed of over 60mph. Horsepower numbers are incredible, but also speculative because the full scale motors have yet to be built. Have a friend who is a retired mechanical engineer and he thinks hydrogen is where we will be in about 10 years. | |
| | |
| Hmm. Well, just read about a hundred million dollar yacht being built that will be powered by three hydrogen motors. Top speed of over 60mph. Horsepower numbers are incredible, but also speculative because the full scale motors have yet to be built. Have a friend who is a retired mechanical engineer and he thinks hydrogen is where we will be in about 10 years. | |
| | |
Posts: 1194
| We hope for clean energy that does not hurt the wildlife, but the fact of the mater we run out of Dinosaurs a long time ago. The more the worlds population goes up so does oil use there will be a day when the tap runs dry. A generation ago no one was driving car in India and China. Do the math. | |
| | |
Posts: 322
| Ranger I can assure you I know more about the current state of our electric grid than you. Talk about carbon reduction 400 acres of trees cleared to make a measly 40 megawatts running at 100% efficiency. Todays panels degrade every single day/year. In order to replace a single coal fired plant with 2 units “1200 megawatts if you know even what that means” it would take well over 12,000 acres of tree clearing to do that. Do you people even realize that’s freaking almost 19 square miles of #*^@ panels! How much carbon can 19 square miles of trees remove from the atmosphere I mean come on. I think the best grid is a diverse grid but you wackos are going to the extreme. Little know fact farmers around me are beginning to add sulphur to the fields due to reduced coal burning nationwide.
Go drink some more bud light buddy.
I honestly thought you would have caught that my comment was a joke thus the 1984/2084 comment lol
Edited by muskymandan 5/31/2023 11:28 PM
| |
| | |
| They put a solar "farm" on some very marginal grass land near my home, went operational about a year ago. It is producing 7.5 megawatts, total site area is 50 acres. No trees were cut, it was played out pasture land. Soil in area is all sand, not good for crops, except potatoes, which require a ton of irrigation and chemical fertilizer.
They actually have more trees on site than when they started, because they planted several hundred evergreens as screening around the edges.
The panels at the time they were installed were supposed to be out of the ordinary because they have a section near the bottom that is angled toward the ground. During the long northern winter, when days are short but there is snow on the ground, they hope to capture reflected sun with the lower panels.
I don't know if solar is the answer, but certainly not all of it or even most of it is replacing forest. In South West, lot of solar is in desert. The larger farms here in WI that I have seen are going in sand country. One in the county where I grew up in central WI did take down some trees, but they were low quality jack pine that had been planted with the idea they would be used for pulp, but the mills they were intended for have closed. Again, low quality soil, sand that has a hard time growing anything without irrigation. | |
| | |
Posts: 3779
| "Little know fact farmers around me are beginning to add sulphur to the fields due to reduced coal burning nationwide.
Go drink some more bud light buddy."
**********************************************************
Oh, well, we sure can't allow the subsidized farmers having to add sulfur. Who cares about asthma, lung cancer, emphysema, and COPD for EVERYONE when the subsidized farmers' profits are at risk. Go ahead and say that volcanoes throw out a lot of sulfur, it's natural, so why not coal plants? Go ahead.
I can only tolerate Bud Light in ice cold long neck bottles. My beer is ice cold Stella in bottles. I think both Bud Light and Stella are owned by the same global corporation, Inbev. If your investment portfolio is properly diversified you may own some of Inbev yourself, it's a great company, very profitable. And the whining, paranoid, undereducated, loud, far right culture war nice tryhole$ have had almost zero impact on the stock price. Or zero. | |
| | |
| Something else on the solar farms are killing trees story. About 7 miles east of my house is high voltage power transmission line. They cut a swath 100 yards or so wide through the forest and that line runs for well over a hundred miles through forest land before hitting farm land further south. And the utility regularly comes and chops down any trees that start to grow back. Rough calculation shows roughly 40 acres per mile of forest cut for the line, so every 10 miles of line equals the farm you reference. And this is just one of many transmission lines. | |
| | |
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Ranger - 5/26/2023 4:22 PM
So, you guys in muskie clubs, do you discuss the fate of muskie fishing? Are long term prospects ever on the agenda? If not, why not?
Organized stakeholders have the loudest voice. Tho sometimes it's hard to be heard over the softer voices of profit takers. Those soft voices, the guys in the shadows who pay politicians to sacrifice environmental health and long-term community prosperity to protect revenue streams, they are very effective.
Muskies Inc does. Getting louder all the time. | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | https://youtu.be/Z4ovtNdvLjM
| |
| | |
Posts: 479
Location: Northern Illinois | Ha!
Edited by RLSea 6/3/2023 10:40 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 479
Location: Northern Illinois | .
Edited by RLSea 6/3/2023 10:40 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1194
| I love it! | |
| | |
Posts: 1186
| sworrall - 6/2/2023 4:25 PM
Ranger - 5/26/2023 4:22 PM
So, you guys in muskie clubs, do you discuss the fate of muskie fishing? Are long term prospects ever on the agenda? If not, why not?
Organized stakeholders have the loudest voice. Tho sometimes it's hard to be heard over the softer voices of profit takers. Those soft voices, the guys in the shadows who pay politicians to sacrifice environmental health and long-term community prosperity to protect revenue streams, they are very effective.
Muskies Inc does. Getting louder all the time.
Muskies Inc. is very limited on how they can advocate, and has to be careful due to their non-profit filing status. The MMPA, on the other hand, is purely about the political advocacy of muskies. Our two chairs, are two of the most plugged in fishing advocates you can find, on the state level. They have basically sacrificed career and family for the last 15 to 20 years, to spend time at the Capitol, testifying, going to stake holder meetings, and more. We also have a paid lobbyist.
One thing that has been learned, is that there are times to be loud, and make noise, and there are other times it is better to pick your battles, in order to win the war. There have been many threats to muskie fishing in Minnesota, but not all, require immediate action. If you recall a few years ago, a call to arms was put out, to combat severe anti-muskie legislation. The sponsor of that legislation and the members of the Senate finance committee, as well as many other state politicians, were absolutely inundated with calls, emails, and letters, from the muskie community, not just in Minnesota, but from all over the place. These politicians were stunned by the response, and the legislation went absolutely nowhere. Other threats have been dealt with in a much quieter way, avoiding poking the bear, fanning flames, or publicly embarrassing legislators. Thus gaining more credibility and respect, in the process. Even thought our main threat(a particular senator) is no longer in office, there are still threats out there, that may require that call to arms, once again. Hopefully not.
Edited by TCESOX 6/4/2023 1:03 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1194
| Fate has played a role in this too. Back in the late 1990's the "No More Muskies" movement started on Lake Miltona after a man saw a Muskie swimming by his pier and was afraid it was going to eat his grandchild and with a bad Bluegill hatch and then same with the Walleyes, all heck broke lose. Minnesota Muskie Fishing has gone down hill since. | |
| | |
Posts: 1186
| chuckski - 6/4/2023 4:55 PM
Fate has played a role in this too. Back in the late 1990's the "No More Muskies" movement started on Lake Miltona after a man saw a Muskie swimming by his pier and was afraid it was going to eat his grandchild and with a bad Bluegill hatch and then same with the Walleyes, all heck broke lose. Minnesota Muskie Fishing has gone down hill since.
Actually, the first decade of the 2000's were incredible fishing. At least I don't think I'm the only one who had some of our best years, then. And thankfully, none of the anti-muskie noise over the last 20 years, has resulted in any legislation or rule making in the DNR. It has hampered progress and expansion, but nothing adverse, ever made it out of committee, due to serious effort by some, and a great response from the muskie community. | |
| | |
Posts: 1194
| Yes the first decade of the 2000 were best fishing for us too, but those fish were stocked in the 1990's. For us time on the water helped too. Two weeks in Canada and late June early July and week in either Minnesota or Wisconsin in the fall. My best fish ever was Minnesota 1999 and dad 2003 Canada. With good numbers and average size. | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | chuckski - 6/4/2023 4:55 PM
Fate has played a role in this too. Back in the late 1990's the "No More Muskies" movement started on Lake Miltona after a man saw a Muskie swimming by his pier and was afraid it was going to eat his grandchild and with a bad Bluegill hatch and then same with the Walleyes, all heck broke lose. Minnesota Muskie Fishing has gone down hill since.
I still think no more Muskies was about the fisherman and not the fish. Some of us can be very inconsiderate and when the bite is on infest a lake like the white bass run on the wolf river. | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | chuckski - 6/5/2023 10:31 AM
Yes the first decade of the 2000 were best fishing for us too, but those fish were stocked in the 1990's. For us time on the water helped too. Two weeks in Canada and late June early July and week in either Minnesota or Wisconsin in the fall. My best fish ever was Minnesota 1999 and dad 2003 Canada. With good numbers and average size.
So many fisheries were developing in that decade in Minnesota, Indiana and LSC was growing with the casting bite and more people realized they could take their musky boats out there. While there are still some hot bites it's not like it was then. | |
| | |
Posts: 8719
| There's nothing else like it when those first few year classes grow to maturity in anew system with no competition for habitat and forage. It's easy to blame everything under the sun but the kind of fishing we saw 20 years ago in MN and IN was artificial and unsustainable.
The only way to have that kind of fishing is to stock new lakes on a rotational basis, and stop stocking lakes that are already established until the muskie populations die off and then start over with an essentially "new" fishery again. If locals are worried about long term effects, just stock hybrids. It could work. I'd bet a real biologist could give me a million reasons why it wouldn't, though. | |
| | |
Posts: 596
Location: Duluth | esoxaddict - 6/5/2023 2:34 PM
There's nothing else like it when those first few year classes grow to maturity in anew system with no competition for habitat and forage. It's easy to blame everything under the sun but the kind of fishing we saw 20 years ago in MN and IN was artificial and unsustainable.
The only way to have that kind of fishing is to stock new lakes on a rotational basis, and stop stocking lakes that are already established until the muskie populations die off and then start over with an essentially "new" fishery again. If locals are worried about long term effects, just stock hybrids. It could work. I'd bet a real biologist could give me a million reasons why it wouldn't, though.
This is correct, most people that I know that recently started musky fishing are oblivious to how limited muskies natural range is/was in Minnesota. | |
| | |
Posts: 8719
| I'm not saying they can't thrive or don't thrive outside their native range, but they sure do seem to do a lot better at home. | |
| |
|
