Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 Author Thread: Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 377 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 10/17/2014 10:09:28 PM
No they aren't. No lab can duplicate the complexities of a planetary ecosystem.

And I apologize. I accused you of being intentionally disingenuous with your insistence to emphasize the tiny percentage of total atmospheric mass volume CO2 comprises. I now believe you really don't understand why that doesn't matter.

I'll make one more try at explaining and then I give up.

Think of he total mass of everything in your home, including the home. Think how tiny of a percentage of that mass is made up of blankets. Now imagine adding six blankets on top of you when you sleep. You will have only increased the mass of your household by a tiny percentage, but you're going to sleep a whole lot warmer. It isn't the percent of mass of your household that matters, but the increase in insulation you've added to your bedding.

Nitrogen and oxygen make up 99% of the atmosphere! but they aren't greenhouse gasses (blankets) so comparing percentage of CO2 to total atmosphere means nothing.

If that doesn't make sense to you I give up.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 375 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 10/17/2014 7:59:39 PM
You're living in it.

Never in human history have greenhouse gas concentrations changed so quickly. It's not possible to do an experiment with an artificial earth. So meticulous research has determined the most likely range of outcomes for these unprecedented factors.

And over the twenty years I've closely followed climate science I keep seeing projections get tweaked toward more and more dire outcomes as more research is done.

A lot of changes have already started. By far the worst is yet to come. The science is clear on that.

So we could pretend the very vocal very tiny minority of dissenting scientists are right and just do nothing because changing the composition of greenhouse gas concentrations just might not have a significant impact, or we could accelerate transition to more efficient use of energy produced from sources that won't run out and have far less environmental impact. But that has a down side that a handful of very wealthy fossil fuel magnates will need to invest their riches in something else while the rest of us live better lives. Gee, decisions, decisions...
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 28 (view)
Do I really HAVE to be looking for a relationship?
Posted: 10/17/2014 3:14:37 PM
I certainly share the frustration here.

I don't define the relationship I'm seeking then look for a female unit to plug into that relationship. I define the type of woman whose company I enjoy and once we meet WE sort out what relationship works best.

My life has run the gamut. I've been alone. I've had platonic female friend activity partners. I've casually dated, had a FWB, been monogamous in a serious relationship for many years. The few times I've ever tried to force a type of relationship on a woman I was attracted to it hasn't gone well. Far better to enjoy us for what works best for us, which is more discovery than forceful creation.

So it irks the hell out of me to be forced to define a relationship I haven't discovered yet. I love to spend time with a woman I'm philosophically compatible with who would enjoy joining me on some of my outdoor adventures. If we paddle happily off into the sunset that would be awesome. If a better fit is periodic shared adventures between separate pursuits of our daily lives that's awesome too. I'm not shy of commitment but don't demand it if its not the right fit either. This seems so sensible to me but I've discovered is quite alien to many others. It's certainly not a good fit for POF criteria, so I mostly just bop on and out here for the forums.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 373 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 10/16/2014 5:58:51 PM
I didn't call you a liar. But the phrasing of your question reveals a disposition to not take a serious problem seriously. Did you read my link? Thre is countless information available about how co2 increases the greenhouse gas effect. Your contrived percentage is akin to me saying a bullet through your heart only comprises a tiny percentage of the bullets in the world, so what harm could one do?

If you're trying to assert that greenhouse gasses that only comprise a tiny percentage of atmospheric mass can't matter you're wrong, and there's over a century of published science to back me up. Its easy to find, as is the science that trace amounts of poison can be lethal. Only a tiny part of the atmosphere consists of greenhouse gasses, but try taking it all away or doubling it and see if you don't experience an uninhabitable planet.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 371 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 10/16/2014 2:41:29 PM
That's kind of like saying the President can't possibly have any impact on the country because he's only one of the seven billion people on the planet.

I suspect you know you're being disengenous, but in case you really don't understand, read this link:
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 369 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 10/15/2014 9:53:30 PM
Probably not, but you won't have to look far to find countless papers explaining that the 40% increase in co2 concentration we've seen very much causes a problem.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 363 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 9/25/2014 8:17:05 PM
Fuglygirl there are countless things that should be different but aren't. Heck we shouldn't need laws at all because everyone should behave respectfully.

But when things aren't right it often takes concerted efforts by the masses to make them right. Today hundreds of Colorado students staged a walkout to protest distorted history curricula. They shouldn't have to do that. But their action is far more likely to right that wrong than just individually musing that things shouldn't be the way they are.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 357 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 9/22/2014 4:46:27 PM
Ya know, maybe we would have had civil rights reform if nobody had bothered to rally or march. Maybe we woukd have left Viet nam just as quickly if there were no protests.

Maybe. But I highly doubt it.

So now we're having a rally' in support of science. I hope it's just as useless and ineffective as those were
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 351 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 9/21/2014 2:36:52 PM
Hmmm... The US military has a huge fleet of jets and Humvees, and they've taken major steps to shrink their environmental impact. The less energy they need the less vulnerable supply lines are and the less resources needed to accomplish their goals. While I'd love to shrink the military itself, that's a topic for another thread and if they can dramatically decrease their energy use that's a good thing and I hope they speak loudly about it rather than STFU.

As for cap and trade, it worked great for the ozone hole and acid rain, no reason it shouldn't for CO2. Businesses thrive on economic incentives. Far better to lead them with that carrot than chase them with regulatory sticks, in my view. But most important is agreeing on the need for carbon reduction. Then we can delve into the best way to get there.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 347 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 9/21/2014 11:49:20 AM
All of us can contribute in our own way.

There's a climate rally coming up in New York. The more people who show up the more effective it will be. Or it could be closed to anyone who can't get there unless they walk or bike. Which is likely to have the greater impact on much needed change?

I applaud anyone who takes personal steps to reduce their environmental footprint. I've taken enough myself that doubling or tripling the price of gas or electricity would have little impact on my personal finances.

Caring for the environment should be a core value for all of us. Squabbling over who adopts or doesn't particular personal practices distracts from the benefit of all of us embracing that core value.

I've spent time working with business to help,them develop environmental management systems that shrink their environmental footprint. Each plan is tailored to that particular business, focusing on the most practical way for them to accomplish the most good by continually taking the most cost effective steps that will improve their practices. What works very well for one may be completely unattainable for another, but any business can improve their practices. The same holds true for individuals.

Avoiding international travel or night flights may be a great option for some, completely impractical for others.

In my view there is far too much guilt and shame tossed around when discussing the environment. If instead everyone simply considered the environmental impact of all their decisions, then made the best choice for them, we would collectively make huge steps forward, and demand better options to include in future choices.

Or we can shoot messengers and point fingers and as a group accomplish far less.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 340 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 9/19/2014 8:24:45 PM
You miss the point completely.

No individual is a perfect environmentalist. We all have an impact on the environment. That's no excuse for denigrating anyone who advocates better environmental stewardship.

Yes we should all strive to walk the talk any way we can. But that doesn't mean we should all live in caves or shut the f### up.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 338 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 9/18/2014 7:42:16 PM
I just don't see the hypocracy.

I drive a Prius. I also drive a pickup truck. When I consistently support the science behind AGW am I more right when I'm in my Prius than when I'm in my truck? If the pope advocates for a stronger environmental ethic is he more right than Charles Manson would be if he said the same thing?

Caring for the only planet we have to call home is essential. Doing so as a species is not a task any one of us can tackle alone. It's something everyone should embrace. Every one of us has done things that have a negative environmental impact. Those of us old enough all used leaded gas, but that didn't keep many of us from supporting the switch to unleaded.

I'm sure fly guy would wholeheartedly support more efficient planes using cleaner fuels, and continued efforts by the airline industry to shrink their carbon footprint.

Exxon has consistently supported skeptic strategies. Some people responded by avoiding Exxon fuel. Others bought stock in Exxon so their voice could help turn the tide from within at stockholder meetings. Both strategies have their place.

I could spend my time hanging out with tree huggers so we could all sing in unison, but I've spent more time talking with coal miners and coal industry leaders, government policy makers and other fossil fuel producers. I celebrate far more when one of them embraces sustainable thinking than when I get affirmation from a lifelong environmentalist.

This is not about "us" vs "them", with winners and losers. It's about all of us recognizing that all of us benefit through better stewardship of the planet. No matter what, ultimately the planet will "win". It's up to us humans whether we want to play on the winning team.

So how about we quit attacking messengers and focus on the message.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 332 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 9/17/2014 10:48:15 PM
It's late and I'll keep this short.

Citing Al Gore means nothing, unless you'll accept me citing how many times Rush Limbaugh or James Inhofe have been wrong as a valid counter argument. Strike that. Just focus on the science, not people who pretend to be scientists or presume to know science better than scientists do in their area of specialty.

Sea ice comes and goes from one year to the next, subject to the vagaries of winds and currents as much as localized air temperatures. Antarctic sea is is higher in some areas, lower in others, but total Antarctic ice mass is on a steep decline. The Polar ice cap is all sea ice. Long term trends are meaningful, with decades as the smallest unit of useful measurement. Noting an increase or decrease from one year to the next is as useful as buying stock based on a single days performance.

Look at global ice mass. Compare the number of shrinking glaciers to the handful that are growing. That's a much better indicator.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 327 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 9/12/2014 10:17:37 PM
No, climate change is really about climate, more than anything else.

Yes there is a lot of money at stake to preserve the status quo, but let's play your "game" just for fun.

No need to spot the green team any points. Let's just level the playing field. Eliminate all energy subsidies, green or traditional. Right off the bat no nuclear plant will ever be built. It will become much more expensive to extract, process, and deliver fossil fuels. No more military support for the Middle East. I don't see protecting access to the sun, wind, and tides needing military intervention.

Let's make every elected official who has received contributions from an energy company, green or traditional, recuse themselves from any energy or climate votes.

And let's be sure to factor environmental and health costs of each energy source into decision making.

Ok, the field is now level. Let the game begin!
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 319 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 8/28/2014 9:06:04 PM

No but the acute willingness of people to purposely falsify reality to validate a bs agenda sure does.

I feel your pain.

I feel the same when I see falsified lists of fake scientists purported to refute climate science, when a fossil fuel company offers a cash reward to anyone who can get published predetermined results refuting AGW, when a fake scandal conveniently breaks in the news over leaked emails just before a major climate report is due to be published, or when false claims are made that someone changed the wording from global warming to climate change, or when the hard work of thousands of scientists is misrepresented as a scheme dreamed up by Al Gore, or pretending global ice mass isn't shrinking and seas aren't rising, or equating sea ice with land based ice sheets.

Yup, falsifying reality to validate a bs agenda is highly offensive, and has no place in a discussion of such a serious matter.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 317 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 8/28/2014 10:55:25 AM
One thermometer doesn't tell us much about what's happening globally. If there are discrepancies with that one they will be corrected and those corrections included in the thousands of other readings around the globe.

Yes I'm predictable. I believe in the scientific method and know well that the science evolves over time as more research refines our knowledge. What I've seen in the decades I've been following climate science is more and more certainty and more dire predictions as the science is refined.

What I've also seen from skeptics is what I think of as the pin prick strategy. Some people seem to think over a century of climate science is akin to a big balloon of knowledge, and if they can just poke a tiny hole in one part of it the entire balloon will collapse. So when an editing mistake included a forecast that Himalayan glaciers would completely disappear in a few decades, which was wrong, skeptics were eager to use that to justify rejecting the entire report.

As I said if you don't accept the validity of the scientific method we can just agree to disagree on what constitutes valid science and there's no further need for discussion. If you do embrace the scientific method you know well that a single thermometer reading has little impact on climate science.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 315 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 8/27/2014 7:40:36 PM
Moon rocket if the scientific method is akin to the occult for you, that pretty much settles our argument. If you judge science by any other metric then we can simply agree to disagree as we apply different standards to our decision making.

That really makes all of this much simpler. The challenge is debating those who profess to believe in science as it is commonly practiced yet claim there is I sufficient science to support the human role in a warming planet. I always ask those folk to show me the research to support their conclusions and it's never forthcoming. Conclusions, yes. Defensible research no.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 306 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 8/17/2014 10:17:30 AM
Here's one primer on how science works

Google can provide plenty of others.

Its intricate, complex, yet at the same time simple. And it often takes us places we didn't expect to go.

Someone does research using accepted scientific practices and publishes their work. Other scientists analyze their processes and results. Some strive to duplicate them independently, either confirming, modifying, or disputing their conclusions. Others hone in on a single aspect of the original research and dive in deeper, publishing their own results and conclusions. The process continues indefinitely so long as there is more yet to be learned or understood.

Along the way different explanations are proposed to explain observed phenomena. All explanations are scrutinized, more research is done, also carefully scrutinized, and over time a consensus emerges. That's NOT proof. Proof is a mathematical concept, not part of science. Science can only disprove, not prove. But science CAN provide adequate scientific explanation to inform technological and political thinking and development.

And that's what's happened with climate science, which continues to evolve. The science supporting the observation that the planet is warming and the hypothesis that human activity is the principle cause has survived many many steps in this process. We have more scientific justification to craft policy based on that hypothesis than we had to implement nuclear power plants or go to the moon.

Certainly there are scientists who differ with specific conclusions or think their research wasn't taken as seriously as it should be. That's an essential part of the process. But if we wait for unanimity among all scientists before taking action we will never do anything. At some point sufficient agreement is reached to take action, and on this issue that point has been overwhelmingly reached.

At this stage it's going to take some truly dramatic new interpretation to counter the many thousands of studies and papers, decades of research and scrutiny that have brought us to where we are today. The hard part now is predicting how drastic and how soon observed additional changes will occur, since we are dealing with unprecedented conditions. What is certainly clear is that the longer we dally the more difficult it will be to minimize negative impacts.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 303 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 8/17/2014 8:15:24 AM

Perfect example of what I was talking about.

Show me the RESEARCH, consistent with diligent application of the scientific method, not cherry picked quotes, that demonstrates human activity plays no significant role on a warming planet.

I could cite plenty of scientists who say the IPCC is overly cautious, but that would be just as pointless.

Opinions are easy to come by.. My opinion is that science has value explaining what has happened and what to expect in the future. Others are free to reject the value of science if they choose, but for those who try to make science based counter arguments there is a well defined process for doing science that has been consistently absent from skeptic arguments.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 301 (view)
Timothy Ball on Climate Change Denial
Posted: 8/16/2014 5:05:50 PM
Wow, haven't been here in ages. Somewhere deep in this thread can be found my earlier musings, but here's my take on the most recent flurry:

What this thread and the various perspectives on this topic demonstrates more than anything is the fundamentally different understanding various people have about science and how it is done.

On the one hand there are those who have a grasp of the scientific method, who clearly see the difference between defensible research and merely offering up an opinion based on what you've read from others you're inclined to agree with.

On the other hand there are those who seem convinced they are every bit as capable of making a scientific judgment from their couch as a dedicated peer reviewed researcher with extensive training and expertise on the topic at hand.

It's as if I was facing a life threatening disease and put equal weight on input from a casual dinner conversation with friends as I did on the guidance of medical professionals specializing in my particular affliction.

Of course everyone is welcome to their opinions. But here in a science forum one would think those on different sides of an issue would base their arguments on SCIENCE, not distorted interpretations of science by those with no demonstrated scientific expertise.

I've tracked climate science for two decades. I'm not a climate scientist nor do I pretend to be one. But I sure can tell the difference between actual research that has survived the peer review process and talking heads who make outrageous claims with no defensible research to back them up, or those who can't tell the difference between sea ice and land ice, or who think the weather in a single location somehow reflects global conditions.

Global warming is a serious problem, one that human activity has a major impact on. That's what the science clearly shows.

But equally important is the large segment of buman population who either reject the value of science or have a highly distorted perception of what it is and how it is done.

We will never address the first problem unless we do something about the second.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 9 (view)
Battery Lawnmowers
Posted: 4/25/2014 4:06:46 PM
My father has had a battery powered mower for several years now. He loves it. He's 83 and only has one arm. At their previous home the yard was big enough he bought a second battery to swap in when the first wasn't enough to do the whole yard. Their new home has a smaller yard so the extra battery is just a spare now. I've never once heard him complain of starting problems, and would think powering up an electric motor would be pretty dependable.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 380 (view)
Beards??? What is going on?
Posted: 3/9/2014 1:08:57 PM

If a women is expected to shave her legs, private parts and armpits or any other place where any kind of hair is, then a man, who doesn't have to shave anywhere, should at least shave his face. That is downright laziness.

No woman I'd be interested in is "expected" by me to shave anywhere. I'm not turned off by hair growing where hair wants to grow. If she chooses to shave that's fine by me too, but certainly not a deal breaker either way.

And yes, laziness might be somewhat accurate for me. Mostly I just don't want to put a lot of time into grooming that could be better spent elsewhere. I stay clean and sufficiently groomed that I won't embarrass anyone. Working in the outdoor industry the dress code is casual, but when I've had other roles that involved meeting with CEO's and elected officials I've cleaned up well enough not to detract from my ability to be effective.

It's interesting how many people feel obliged to groom to certain standards as if they can't express their personal tastes without negatively impacting their ability to do their job. Yet I've known powerful women in important jobs who didn't wear makeup or shave their legs, and comparable men who sported scraggly beards, didn't wear socks, or wore the same suit day after day.

We all have our tastes and there's nothing wrong with that. It makes most sense to me to dress and groom however makes us feel best about ourselves, and we'll attract those who are attracted to us at our most comfortable.

She was an idiot.
Just chip off the ice before kissing

Yes, she was. Or at least a bad fit for me.
And that ice sloughed off quickly as soon as I got inside. That pic was taken on a week long back country ski adventure with my last girlfriend. We ultimately weren't compatible, but my beard was never included in her list of complaints.
On the other hand a second date this winter that never got to a third DID comment about not liking to kiss a hairy face. I understand. I don't like to kiss lipstick. Hopefully we all find what we like eventually.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 68 (view)
West Virginia water crisis
Posted: 3/8/2014 6:12:51 AM
Yes the EPA has the right to regulate CO2, and if there were indeed significant impacts from soft drinks I expect they'd approach that problem the same as they handled flourocarbons in aerosols. But there isn't, so that's unlikely to be an issue.

If you want to fuss about regulation and management of a common compound, why aren't you screaming about federal and state management of water? Plenty of precedent there. Dams, dikes, canals, culverts, stormwater regulation, even rainwater regulation in some states. My sister is legally forbidden to collect rainwater off of her own roof. Without regulation and management of water your own state would be in far more dire straits for water supply.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 43 (view)
breaking laws
Posted: 2/24/2014 9:23:57 AM

(woodstoves) When I said green wood, I meant wood that just isn't seasoned very much.

....and that kind of wood should NEVER be used in a wood stove. It releases far more creosote, particulates, and compounds and generates far less heat.

If you see smoke coming from your chimney or stove pipe you have an inefficient fire. Well seasoned hardwood burned in an efficient stove produces very little emissions and except when first being started should not produce visible smoke.

The other factor to consider is that a dead tree will release its co2 naturally, in the same quantity as it will when burned. Fossil fuels, on the other hand, store that co2 underground until extracted by humans and combusted. So the net increase in co2 in the atmosphere comes from fossil fuel use, not wood burning.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 6 (view)
Condom Conundrum
Posted: 2/22/2014 10:55:51 AM
You know, there's a huge double standard at play when it comes to condoms.

Read these forums and engage in the discussion many other places and you'd swear that unprotected sex is guaranteed to result in an STD, and if you happen to get lucky once or twice your odds just increase as you continue to play sexual russian roullette.

But that just hasn't been my experience in real life. I get a full round of tests between partners. I've never tested positive for anything. I've never had a woman come back to me and tell me she thought she caught something from me. (I know you can't test for everything) And at 55 I number my past partners in the dozens, although never multiple partners during the same time period.

Personally I'd rather not have sex than use a condom. I'm up front about that and do my utmost not to sway a prospective partner to do anything she's not comfortable with. On a few occasions in my life that's been a deal breaker, but very few. It seems a whole lot of people say one thing in public and do another in private. And a whole lot of us have led full and fulfilling sex lives without contracting anything. A lot of women don't like condoms either, and are quite happy with sharing test results as adequate assurance.

I'm not here to attempt to change anyone's mind about their personal practices. Sex is too wonderful to mar it with doubts or fears. But for those adverse to condoms who can find comfort in STD testing results know that you are not alone.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 37 (view)
Boating as an interest
Posted: 2/22/2014 10:31:48 AM
A peek at the pics in my profile will show that my kind of boating is a bit different from what everyone else describes here. I should be out boating today but was too pooped from a long work week to get the logistics together. It's not for everyone, but boring it's not!
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 6 (view)
Can we agree?
Posted: 2/20/2014 4:28:45 PM
If you're looking for agreement, or at least more civil disagreement, I'd suggest rephrasing your options:

1) What are the most important duties of the Office of President? What would you most like to see a President do discreet from the duties of the other two branches of government?

2) A number of people want to come to the US to live and work. How should we best manage this phenomenon?

3) Guns. Can't help you on that one. If you can find a way to address it in a non-polarizing way I'm all for it.

4) What improvements could we make to increase quality, affordability, and access to health care?

5) What are the best strategies to reduce the national deficit and debt?

6) If you could make positive changes in campaign finance practices, what would they be?

7) Is there a voter fraud problem? If so how best to address it?

8) Abortion. Almost as tough as guns, but how about this: "Is there any middle ground to be found between an absolute prolife stance (no abortions ever under any circumstances) and allowing any female of any age to have easy access to an abortion if she so chooses? What might that middle ground look like?

knowing us, the usual suspects will respond in the usual ways, but I agree in spirit with the concept of seeking common ground wherever it might be found. And I certainly agree we should argue the topic(s), not attack those with different perspectives from our own. A goodly dose of respect can go a long way.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 232 (view)
Just looking for friends
Posted: 2/19/2014 11:03:34 AM
Speak for yourself---not all of us women slap ambiguous labels on dating and call it "friendship" just because we want to take things slowly. Some of us are actually articulate enough to speak our minds without the use of labels.

Moreover, not all of us women want to put artificial time constraints on when sex occurs---some of us prefer to let it happen organically---whether it be the second date, third date, fourth date, or whenever both partners feel ready.

Thank you.

This is one of those classic guy/gal frustrations. Many of us men become frustrated with women who say one thing and mean another. Many women resort to evasive tactics to hold the horn dogs at bay. All wish the others would just behave in a way that works better for us.

It gets tiresome as a respectful man to be tarred by a gender wide brush. Fortunately that aspect of dating, I find, gets easier as we age. One of the few aspects of middle age dating that IS easier. Far more women in my age bracket are more direct and honest, and the jaded ones are pretty easy to spot and avoid. I don't think any of us from either gender want to bear the brunt of responsibility for every past transgression of our own gender.

I devote a portion of my profile to clarifying that its not the type of relationship I seek, but the type of woman. I too prefer to let things happen organically. If I enjoy your company and you mine we will figure out soon enough what works best for us. Happily ever after may be the ideal, but not having found that yet and being more than hallway through my life I've got too much quality living to do yet to hold out for perfection and reject opportunities for fulfilling companionship.

I resent being forced to pick what we are looking for in order to participate in this site, so I clarify in my profile. And honestly I pay no attention to what an interesting woman fills in that blank with. Once we interact and certainly once we meet it all becomes either much more clear or much more clear that she doesn't really know what she wants.

Some women present in person just as they do in their profile. Some just the opposite. I've had equal measure of prudish profiles result in over the top first date advances as I have highly sexed profiles turn into stand offish dates. And then there are those who keep flipping from hot to cold and back again. Such is the adventure of dating. All we can do is figure it out the best we can as we go.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 16 (view)
Trying to Make Heads or Tails
Posted: 2/11/2014 11:05:34 AM
We don't really know if he's just into you for sex or if he's just lightly attracted to you, but the truth is he's just not that into you or he would have demonstrated it by now

I've seen cases where women who were initially not that attracted to a guy were ultimately won over, but I've yet to see that happen with a guy. Not that some guys don't find themselves more involved than they might have wished but in those cases their heart is just going through the motions.

I know gender stereotyping is dangerous, and I'm sure there's a guy out there or two who ultimately fell strongly in love after a long period of ambivalence, but I think those guys are far more rare than their female counterparts. Even though women are often thought of as being the more emotional gender, it strikes me that women are more likely to let factors like "good provider", "good father", and other practical considerations impact their emotional attraction than men are. We guys tend to either feel it or we don't.

And this guy clearly doesn't.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 117 (view)
Are there any gentlemen out there?
Posted: 2/11/2014 10:09:10 AM

Perhaps the poster who gave us #3 is telling you that some women have enough attention from various men that they do not have to HUNT...they choose the best one for them.

Ah but the pool to pick the "best" from will be limited to those who approach you. Kinda like only shopping from the items displayed at the end of the aisle. If you know the characteristics you're looking for and see them in a man, why just cross your fingers and hope he comes after you? Unless of course one of those key characteristics is someone who will always take the initiative.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 99 (view)
When should a mature lady become more proactive?
Posted: 2/9/2014 1:21:15 AM
Fascinating. I didn't realize this would be a topic about which people would divide so cleanly into different camps.

In other words, guessing and mind reading are more helpful than just saying what you feel for each other.

So let me get this straight. If a traffic cop is standing in the middle of an intersection scowling at you with his hand held up you'll drive right over him because you were forced to guess and mind read if you didn't hear him say the word "stop!" In a loud clear voice?

Look, I get as frustrated as anyone if I can't figure out how my date is feeling about me. I'm just saying there are ways she can show interest besides words, and that I'm not going to propose serious commitment or intimacy unless I've got a pretty good idea she'll be receptive based on ALL the ways she's been communicating with me so far. If she's the type to keep her thoughts and feelings close to her vest and force me to continually go out on a limb for us to move forward then we're not a good match, but apparently she would be just your type.

Interests like skiing won't make either of you more attractive to the other.

Speak for yourself. Plenty of happy couples share a passion for dance, the same music, volunteerism, hiking, biking, art that are a big part of their attraction for each other.

Ironically, in a few hours I'm about to have a first date with a woman. We very nearly made this first date a ski date, but since the logistics would be difficult without an overnight stay decided to meet for brunch instead. But our shared interest in skiing is very much part of our initial attraction.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 74 (view)
When it comes to finding a relationship, are you ambitious, or are you a slacker?
Posted: 2/8/2014 7:51:19 PM
This whole concept of seeking a relationship doesn't sit well with me. It makes me feel like a puzzle piece that others are comparing to their particular fantasy.

I'm not seeking a relationship. I'm seeking a woman I can connect well with. Once we've found each other we can commence building a relationship whose particulars will suit us, rather than first defining the relationship then seeking the perfect mate to suit it.

I idle along until a woman.of interest comes to my attention, then I can be quite ambitious exploring our potential connection.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 95 (view)
When should a mature lady become more proactive?
Posted: 2/8/2014 7:34:23 PM

What is the speed limit?

Remember your physics now. Acceleration is not the same thing as velocity. No speed limit, just don't accelerate too fast if she's not keeping up or already ahead of you.

Guessing vs. honest communication. Honest communication promotes communication. Guessing never helps.

Who said anything about guessing? Just remember that honest communication is about much more than words. Body language is often more honest than words, and its very much communication. Is she leaning toward you or away? Has she initiated any sort of touch, however innocent? Does she hold your gaze? Have you found topics you're both passionate about? I try to heed my brain, my heart, my instincts as well as needing to feel sensually/sexually attracted. Does she seem to be responding positively from at least two of those drivers?

Please tell me you can tell the difference between someone who is into you and someone who is not.

Please cite to the manual.

If there was a manual we wouldn't need this thread, would we?

Seriously, everything in this thread speaks to broken social rituals and distorted expectations. People have been socialized to guess and be less than forthright.

Rituals? Expectations? Screw that. You're exploring how interested you are in each other. All I'm saying is PAY ATTENTION not just to your own evolving feelings but your potential partners as well. Too many fall victim to only heeding their own level of attraction. And this isn't about what other people think or how they do it in books, tv, movies or even the last time you were exploring a potential relationship. It's about the two of you, here, now. Tune into that and forget all that external static.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 93 (view)
When should a mature lady become more proactive?
Posted: 2/8/2014 2:42:29 PM
I think what it all boils down to is not asking for a dramatic acceleration out of the blue. Pretty sure I learned that lesson in my teens. I've come out of a second date with both of us committed exclusively before, but because both of us felt that confident at that stage, not because one of us sprung a request on the other. It's just a matter of being tuned in to each other. If you're going to be that far along that soon it should be clear to both that the other is that into them.

You'd think as we age we'd get better at all this but sometimes the opposite is true. I think some become impatient with letting things develop naturally and are inclined to just cut to the chase. Someone relatively fresh out of a long term relationship may be eager to embark on another without going through all the necessary steps first. If those steps are going to fly by quickly both need to be racing together.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 139 (view)
Why did you choose Plenty of Fish? Thoughts on other Dating Sites?
Posted: 2/8/2014 9:57:10 AM
The changes here over the years have made it less useful to me, but I'm sure it works great for many others. I'm mostly here just for the forums, but still browse profiles now and then and get a couple of first messages a week from others whose interest is piqued by my profile.

I met my last girlfriend on greensingles, which caters to my treehugging crowd. It's a pay as you go site, so it doesn't cost to just be there, only when you initiate a message with someone you haven't already corresponded with. You buy credits, reasonably priced, and it costs one credit to send out an initial message. I like that approach, and have never run across a scammer there.

I've been on match in the past and still have a hidden profile there but have not been motivated to re-up this go round.

My current favorite is OKC. I like to delve deeper than a standard profile allows. When these forums were actively promoted here this provided a great venue to learn how someone actually thinks. It made POF seem like a real community. Now it's just those of us who know the secret handshake who hang out here, and the lack of a steady stream of new participants means some of us just keep having the same arguments over the same things.

OKC has forums but they're barely used. But their optional questions can provide great insight and save a lot of false starts. My last two dates came from there, with another first date scheduled for tomorrow. The fact that I'm having my third first date in several weeks shows no there's no guarantee anywhere, but both of those first two fell into the "close but no cigar" category. Both were enjoyable dates, just not quite enough to warrant a second for one or both of us.

I have seen the occasional scammer here on POF, but far less than on Match. I've had one on OKC contact me, but there are also plenty of fake profiles easy to recognize by the way they're put together, always including an attractive woman half my age seeking men in my age range but offering little profile detail.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 61 (view)
West Virginia water crisis
Posted: 2/7/2014 10:33:10 PM
So just to update everyone, its been a month since this spill and few of the 300,000 affected residents trust their water. Schools open one day, close the next. I live outside the impacted area, but this weekend am hosting a friend who has been making do with rainwater for an entire month now, with all plumbing shut off awaiting replacement along with a contaminated hot water tank. It seems that heat aggravates the negative effects of contaminated water. It seems that the chemicals soak into PVC plumbing then gradually leech back out. But nobody knows for sure.

I usually avoid citing fox or msnbc, but this clip accurately portrays life for 1/6 of all West Virginians, over a month after an unprecedented spill contaminated their water.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 179 (view)
Is there such thing as too many sex partners?
Posted: 2/7/2014 9:35:17 PM

I'd be able to understand it as a woman who made bad choices in partners... and in who she breeds with... Sorry, she is still the common denominator here... Not the least of which, 2 failed relationships and she gets pregnant again before marriage?

Wow. Just wow.

I can think of several women I know with multiple children from different partners whose personal ethics far outshine many others I know of both genders whose offspring were all with the same mate.

Please join the twenty first century. Marriage is not a requirement for responsible parenting. Relationships can fail or end through no fault of one partner, and sometimes ending a relationship is far better for the children involved than continuing a contentious or abusive relationship.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 118 (view)
Woman who sucks at sex!!!!
Posted: 2/6/2014 10:31:39 AM

My partner makes a point of pleasing me because doing so pleases him, and ultimately I will do what is needed to make sure he's as happy as I am.

And that same attitude in a woman is what makes her a great sex partner. The extent to which that's lacking determines how desirable she may or may not be, to me anyway. It's not hard to tell the difference between a woman who is eager to please, one that's merely willing to please, and one who is just willing to allow.

Sometimes two people just don't match up well, without one being "better" or "worse". Some women really like it rough, want to be slammed hard for long periods at a time. My back just can't maintain that indefinitely, and I'm more into sensual delights than becoming little more than a piston for 20 minutes straight. Doesn't make her bad at sex, just not a good match for what I have to offer. Now if much longer stretches of tongue, touches, combined with intercourse are your cup of tea....
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 77 (view)
Does it matter if a person is a nudist?
Posted: 2/5/2014 8:04:00 PM
My father is politically conservative, teetotaling, never swears, 58 years married, and a nudist. He was fond at their last home of running naked through the woods and skinny dipping in their pond.

Having grown up with that plus having a circle of friends where nudity may not be a regular practice but with whom no fuss is made if we change out of wet river clothes in sight of each other, I wouldn't care one way or another if a date prospect announced a fondness for nudity early or late in our get to know you phase.

Personally I strive not to offend, but if others don't mind would much rather skinny dip or hot tub naked. I can't see myself doing outside chores naked or seeking out a nudist resort, but am certainly comfortable in my own skin, covered or not.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 14 (view)
Are there any gentlemen out there?
Posted: 2/3/2014 6:31:42 PM

Now, personally, I've NEVER asked a woman for sex. On a first date, or after.

Doesn't mean I've never had sex on a first date, or after. I've just never had to "ask" for it.

Ditto, or almost anyway. The only times I've ever asked have been when she's made it quite clear that the answer will be positive, and I haven't guessed wrong yet. NDT I'm so sorry to hear about your situation. Please know men like Walts and I have plenty of company.

It's really not all that difficult to hold a decent conversation without taking it x-rated when that's not appropriate. If there's a spark of sexual interest it's so much better to nurse that spark with bits of tinder and kindling rather than smother it with big logs. Makes for a much better fire.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 34 (view)
Lack of Effort
Posted: 2/3/2014 6:05:40 PM
It better be one hell of a picture to stimulate my interest, and not just of her looking attractive but of her doing something active that tells me she just might be a good match.

Anyone who's read me here knows I am not short on words, and appreciate a woman who can engage me in real conversation, not make me pry everything out of her.

So 99.9% of the time I'll pass a scant profile by. In fact if I get a short initiating message from someone and their profile is equally devoid of info I won't even respond to that either.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 63 (view)
Is the friendzone even real...
Posted: 2/3/2014 3:39:36 PM

Those who choose and enjoy to be in the friend zone are usually homosexuals latent or out

Alas, the source of that quote has been escorted off the premises and all traces of her removed, including the other thread relating to friends with exes that spawned all sorts of fireworks.

The takehome from that thread was that some people are far more comfortable than others transitioning from relationship to friendship, but some are indeed comfortable with it. And I suspect those folk are also more willing to give a relationship a go with a friend without fearing total loss of friendship if it doesn't take.

I really think this is all a matter of vocabulary. You meet someone and sort out between the two of you how you might best get along, or not. Sometimes you try in one direction and end up in another. Sometimes you pledge to "just be friends" and never see each other again. Sometimes you indeed become good friends.

One thing very clear in the now defunct other thread is that people are very, very different in how they approach this concept. There are those who can't seem to ever interact with someone of the opposite gender without either some sort of sexual tension or judging them for the lack of it. Others might interchange male and female friends without hardly noticing their gender. They cherish the friendships and don't think of them in a sexual way.

And of course some are glad to include exes in their friend circle, but that's a topic for another thread that now isn't.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 359 (view)
Beards??? What is going on?
Posted: 2/3/2014 3:18:26 PM

As long as they are aware that such (if not used properly) can scratch surfaces in a rough way, and they can engineer their way around it, its A-okay.

Yup, got that covered. Different men have different beard characteristics, but from feedback over the years I think I've figured out not only the appropriate length, but also best grooming strategy to preclude an "ouch" when there should be an "oh.....ah......"

I first grew my beard at the request of my then girlfriend, many, many years ago. I've only shaved it off twice since. Both times I was told I looked younger without it, but since the face I was looking at WAS older than the last time I saw it, my reaction was the opposite. So in each case I immediately started growing it back and we had six more weeks of winter.

Some women like it, some not. Once a first date didn't happen because she insisted I shave off the beard first. Better to know that sort of thing right up front. I'm happy with it, which makes me happy with myself and more appealing to anyone I might be with.

Mine looks horrible if I let it grow very long, so I stick with an "8" mm beard trimmer setting and mow it at least once a week. I figure it's much like the glamour look some women prefer and others exchew. It lets prospects know what to expect and we can all go from there.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 162 (view)
Is there such thing as too many sex partners?
Posted: 2/3/2014 10:27:01 AM

I agree, but that's where communication sweeps in. Someone was trying to turn me on by doing something that turns MOST women on, but it doesn't work on me. When he did something I liked, I told him I like it, and to continue. He understood that the other thing wouldn't work for me, even when he tried it a couple of times.

And that's the crux of it all. Having a lot of partners MIGHT expose you to a wider range of techniques and such, but if you're like the man in your example it won't help you be a better lover. And trust me, there are women like that too, who think laying back and allowing sex to happen is all they need to do.

But what makes a good lover a good lover, for either gender, is tuning into your partner and figuring out what pleases them most while effectively communicating your likes to them.

And there's where quality trumps quantity. The bulk of my learning came from a small number of partners over the years who brought it all- enthusiasm, clear communication, eagerness to dial up the experience for BOTH of us in so many creative ways. They are the ones who gave me the experience to bring a healthy approach to any woman I'm with. Some people seem just destined to be bad lovers, others come by it naturally, and for the large number on the middle a considerate, enthusiastic partner focused on doing what YOU like can help make you better at returning the same approach to them.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 21 (view)
My Girlfriend Just broke up with Me. HELP!!!
Posted: 2/2/2014 7:01:18 PM
If he's not careful SHE'LL own the company by the time this is said and done....
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 24 (view)
How Risky Is Air-Travel?
Posted: 2/2/2014 6:12:57 PM
So back on topic, of sorts....

The helicopter pilots I've flown with always raise the point that given an engine failure they can autorotate down just about anywhere, and don't have to look for something resembling a runway. To all you fixed wing affiandos, what say you to that as a safety factor?
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 84 (view)
Favorite documentary?
Posted: 2/2/2014 4:46:28 PM
"Too Hot Not To Handle" , an HBO documentary about climate change, but I'm a little prejudiced: I'm in it!
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 3 (view)
Same, same but different
Posted: 2/2/2014 1:52:32 PM
I think you're on to something.

Here in the U.S. it's easy to think of us as being completely polarized, roughly split down the middle between conservatives and liberals.

And yet so many of us share the same values. We love our families and want to feel secure in our ability to provide for them. I've yet to meet a conservative who hates clean water or clean air, nor a liberal who hates having money in their pocket. Yet both sides consistently accuse the other of being nothing but a money hungry capitalist or socialist tree hugger.

We argue tooth and nail over the solutions. More regulation or less, more taxes or less, more money here, less money there, build or don't build a pipeline, it goes on and on. But often at the core of our disputes are simply two different approaches to embrace the same values.

Liberals may abhor the number of people in poverty and want more funding for social services. Conservatives may also wish less were in poverty but insist the way out is for them to work their way out, not give them something free they had to work for. So we battle over funding those services or not rather than sitting down together to address the root of the poverty. That's just one example.

If we could place more emphasis on shared values, then maybe focus research on how best to support those values, just maybe we wouldn't be at each others throats so much.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 14 (view)
My Girlfriend Just broke up with Me. HELP!!!
Posted: 2/2/2014 12:01:17 PM
Much good advice here. No need for me to pile on. This in particular should have value to you:

You did not "snap" because she was a *****. You became emotionally reactive when you felt threatened, egotistically and then, blamed her for your emotional inadequacies, moral and ethical incompetence! This is disturbing, horrid behaviour.

It's time you owned your emotions. Nobody else makes you happy, sad, angry. You choose to engage those emotions. Sometimes it's challenging not to be reactive, but remember that any time you let someone else dictate your emotions you're handing them control of how you feel. Make your own choices.

And another aspect not directly addressed here. How will your decision whether to hire her back impact the working environment at your workplace for any other employees? How will that impact productivity at work? Since you've chosen to mix work and personal life you're not the only two affected here.
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 5 (view)
How do I message a Mutual Meet me who has't message me first?
Posted: 1/30/2014 9:48:43 PM
Yup, what they said.

There may be guys who are turned off by a woman making first contact but I don't know any.

And I agree that sparse profiles often lead to sparse messages. I'm not very patient with those, but that's your call.

Good luck!
Show ALL Forums