Looks like we are past the Global Warming thing

[napabavarian]

Is he humping the iceberg?

[Hallen]

You are ignorant. Now SUPPORT your beliefs global warming is just a political maneuver. You have just posted denial, with no facts, no stats, NOTHING. Just your beliefs. So see, THERES the real fucking problem. We point out some solid facts and stats, then there are the naysayers who just automatically dismiss the claims, with no reasonable doubt. Ive repeatedly said numerous times that it is ignorant to be closed minded either way regarding the global warming controversy.

OK, let me break it down for you:
(for the purposes of this discussion the term "Global Warming" is used to indicate that theory which states that mankind's activities are the cause of rapidly increasing temperatures worldwide)

There was no science to back up the claims of Global Warming. The numbers that were there have been examined and it has been shown that the numbers don't add up. Furthermore, real scientists have stepped forward with data showing how the climate changes over time and that the changes we see now, and the ones we saw in the 70's, are historically normal and most likely not something to be alarmed about.

(Notice I didn't say definitively. Like I said, you can't really prove the negative. All you can do is show real data and back that up with good science. In this case, that good science shows that the "science" of Global Warming is flawed.)

My second point is this:
The Global Warming people basically postulated a hypothesis and presented it as fact and have dared the world to prove it wrong. This is bad science and typically indicate ulterior motives. The biggest premise of the Global Warming crowd is that it is a man-made problem. This is the part that is extremely questionable yet is the forefront of their arguments.

My hypothesis is this:
People do things for a reason. Therefore, somebody expected to benefit from the Global Warming alarmism. The instigators had to know that their science was bad unless they really had no business analysing this kind of data (in other words, they weren't real scientists). They reached a conclusion based on what they wanted or expected to see. Therefore, my hypothesis is that environmentalists used this Global Warming theory to promote their own agendas.

Simple. That is how I get there. It may be the wacky theory of Global Warming came first and was then picked up by the environmentalists, or that the environmentalists created the whole thing from the start. I don't know. Either way, it is the worst kind of Chicken Little or Boy Who Cried Wolf antics that there are.

So, I believe that the planets weather patterns morph and change over time. There is a rhythm to it and there are causation factors. However, we don't know and don't fully understand what those factors are and are far from really understanding it. To say that there is Global Warming (again, look at the definition above) is ridiculous.

By the way, others have posted facts in this thread about CO2 content and its effects. If Global Warming is happening, then chances are it is driven by other factors than man-made factors. The methane gas amounts in the atmosphere are a much more critical factor than CO2, by a long, long ways. However, everything you read about this stuff uses the term Global Warming implying that people cause it. Read this one... However, notice the scientist quoted says nothing of the kind. She just says more methane is released as the oceans warm (according to her theory which also may be incorrect). The journalist who wrote the article slips in the pump for Global Warming. All of that gets all neatly wrapped up and presented for consumption and leads people to believe things that are not true. It is malicious and intentional.

I don't know why I bother outlining this stuff. You'll just skim it, call me names, and restate that you know better.

[mrsleeve]

All I see here are baseless claims. How do you know the effect is small? Where is the evidence that people are making tons of money off of this? I think any investment in green energy is a huge gamble and very little money has been returned or will be returned for a while. Especially with the low gas prices as of late, do you really think people are making much money? Of course not.

HUH AL has made millions upon millions with this CRAP, we have a "Green" channel now, people spend huge sums of money to make a home "Green friendly" The huge amounts of money that have been put into biofuel, refineries (they have made me a ton of money). The farmers that have all switched from food crops to crops for fuel, the fact that anything with corn in it has sky rocketed due to fuel Vs food production. I can go on and on about how much people are making off this green fear mongering.


And again CO2 is a trace element an its effect is Logarithmic which means you need to add 4 times as much to get double the current effect. That = little effect as we dont put out shit compared to mother nature every day, we have in no way increased total global C02 out put by 4x as a industrial race. Mother nature puts out on the order of 10x the amount of CO2 in one year, that all of humanity has released since the dawn of time.

The polar bears will be fine they will live as a species to drown some other time.

[Nicademus]

Here is proof. Their sign isn't even current. See how long they've been waiting for help?



And here is that same bear today. Notice his friend is gone and drowned and the ice is almost totally melted!


And check it out, they're dieing from heat exhaustion before we can shoot them: click here

[Maluco]

co2 is 38 parts per million, a trace element,and it's effect is logrithmic. you have to quadruple co2 to get a double of whatever effect it supposedly is having

exactly! and CO2 levels are the main arguement for majority of man made global warming proponents... I really wish someone would have debated Al Whore as soon as he started blabbering his dumb mouth.



Climate Scientist Roy Spencer argues:

"We live in an invisible atmospheric sea of water vapor, Earth's primary greenhouse gas. Our atmosphere could hold much more water vapor than it does, which would then lead to a much warmer Earth -- but it doesn't. So, why is the greenhouse effect limited to its current value? We don't know; scientists simply "assume" that it magically stays that way.

Current computerized climate models that predict large amounts of global warming only do so after making very crude and uncertain assumptions about how the Earth's natural greenhouse effect is maintained. In the following article I will explain why I believe that modern science can not say with any level of confidence how much of our current global warmth is caused by mankind without knowing why the Earth's greenhouse effect is limited to its current value.

In the following article I will explain why the answer to this question must be through the operation of precipitation systems, for only they can remove water vapor from the atmosphere. Even though all climate models DO contain the "average effects" of precipitation systems -- this is NOT the same as knowing how precipitation systems interactively regulate the climate system.

Al Gore likes to say that mankind puts 70 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day. What he probably doesn't know is that mother nature puts 24,000 times that amount of our main greenhouse gas -- water vapor -- into the atmosphere every day, and removes about the same amount every day. While this does not 'prove' that global warming is not manmade, it shows that weather systems have by far the greatest control over the Earth's greenhouse effect, which is dominated by water vapor and clouds."

http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-...al-warming.htm

Ok sure there is still an effect, I can live with that statement. Just like when an ant crawls out on to a steel girder, the ant's weight deflects the girder some tiny fraction of a MM that is so small that it cant be measured, this is the type of effect that we as humans are having on the climate.

GW/ CC is nothing but a move to make untold amounts of money on the hysteria, also a political move to further the Green agenda.

All I see here are baseless claims. How do you know the effect is small? Where is the evidence that people are making tons of money off of this? I think any investment in green energy is a huge gamble and very little money has been returned or will be returned for a while. Especially with the low gas prices as of late, do you really think people are making much money? Of course not.

[joshh]

You are ignorant. Now SUPPORT your beliefs global warming is just a political maneuver. You have just posted denial, with no facts, no stats, NOTHING. Just your beliefs. So see, THERES the real fucking problem. We point out some solid facts and stats, then there are the naysayers who just automatically dismiss the claims, with no reasonable doubt. Ive repeadetly said numerous times that it is ignorant to be closed minded either way regarding the global warming controversy.

The problem there is they took some of that data and jumped to a solid conclusion. That alone voids Science.

[E30 Cabrio]

Different Generation, same Bullshit:

Time Magazine - Monday, Jun. 24, 1974
Another Ice Age?


In Africa, drought continues for the sixth consecutive year, adding terribly to the toll of famine victims. During 1972 record rains in parts of the U.S., Pakistan and Japan caused some of the worst flooding in centuries. In Canada's wheat belt, a particularly chilly and rainy spring has delayed planting and may well bring a disappointingly small harvest. Rainy Britain, on the other hand, has suffered from uncharacteristic dry spells the past few springs. A series of unusually cold winters has gripped the American Far West, while New England and northern Europe have recently experienced the mildest winters within anyone's recollection.


As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.


Telltale signs are everywhere —from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported by other convincing data. When Climatologist George J. Kukla of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and his wife Helena analyzed satellite weather data for the Northern Hemisphere, they found that the area of the ice and snow cover had suddenly increased by 12% in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever since. Areas of Baffin Island in the Canadian Arctic, for example, were once totally free of any snow in summer; now they are covered year round.


Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world. Indeed it is the widening of this cap of cold air that is the immediate cause of Africa's drought. By blocking moisture-bearing equatorial winds and preventing them from bringing rainfall to the parched sub-Sahara region, as well as other drought-ridden areas stretching all the way from Central America to the Middle East and India, the polar winds have in effect caused the Sahara and other deserts to reach farther to the south. Paradoxically, the same vortex has created quite different weather quirks in the U.S. and other temperate zones. As the winds swirl around the globe, their southerly portions undulate like the bottom of a skirt. Cold air is pulled down across the Western U.S. and warm air is swept up to the Northeast. The collision of air masses of widely differing temperatures and humidity can create violent storms—the Midwest's recent rash of disastrous tornadoes, for example.


Sunspot Cycle. The changing weather is apparently connected with differences in the amount of energy that the earth's surface receives from the sun. Changes in the earth's tilt and distance from the sun could, for instance, significantly increase or decrease the amount of solar radiation falling on either hemisphere—thereby altering the earth's climate. Some observers have tried to connect the eleven-year sunspot cycle with climate patterns, but have so far been unable to provide a satisfactory explanation of how the cycle might be involved.


Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth.
Climatic Balance. Some scientists like Donald Oilman, chief of the National Weather Service's long-range-prediction group, think that the cooling trend may be only temporary. But all agree that vastly more information is needed about the major influences on the earth's climate. Indeed, it is to gain such knowledge that 38 ships and 13 aircraft, carrying scientists from almost 70 nations, are now assembling in the Atlantic and elsewhere for a massive 100-day study of the effects of the tropical seas and atmosphere on worldwide weather. The study itself is only part of an international scientific effort known acronymically as GARP (for Global Atmospheric Research Program).


Whatever the cause of the
cooling trend, its effects could be extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a 1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred years.


The earth's current climate is something of an anomaly; in the past 700,000 years, there have been at least seven major episodes of glaciers spreading over much of the planet. Temperatures have been as high as they are now only about 5% of the time. But there is a peril more immediate than the prospect of another ice age. Even if temperature and rainfall patterns change only slightly in the near future in one or more of the three major grain-exporting countries—the U.S., Canada and Australia —global food stores would be sharply reduced. University of Toronto Climatologist Kenneth Hare, a former president of the Royal Meteorological Society, believes that the continuing drought and the recent failure of the Russian harvest gave the world a grim premonition of what might happen. Warns Hare: "I don't believe that the world's present population is sustainable if there are more than three years like 1972 in a row."

• Find this article at:
• http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...944914,00.html

BTW, satellite's that are orbiting 25,000 miles above the Earth are showing correlating temperature changes similar to what we are seeing here on Earth over the past several years.

The Sun does not burn at one constant temperature. It fluctuates up and down.

People 20 years from now are going to be laughing at how stupid the Global Warming crowd is/was.

I don't know what's more ignorant: people who think that we are causing global temperature change, or thinking that we can actually control these temperature changes by modifying our behavior.

[mrsleeve]

There is still an effect...

Ok sure there is still an effect, I can live with that statement. Just like when an ant crawls out on to a steel girder, the ant's weight deflects the girder some tiny fraction of a MM that is so small that it cant be measured, this is the type of effect that we as humans are having on the climate.

GW/ CC is nothing but a move to make untold amounts of money on the hysteria, also a political move to further the Green agenda.

[napabavarian]

Repeatedly.

At this entire thread.

[jflip2002]

You must accept that the global warming thing was just a political maneuver by environmental extremists to help push their agendas forward faster. Veganism, no fossil fuels, all organic food, communal living, no shaving, technology adverse, economically retarded, self sacrificing bull crap. They can't get what they want in their lifetimes so they created something that would drive the changes they want faster. It's simple.

You are ignorant. Now SUPPORT your beliefs global warming is just a political maneuver. You have just posted denial, with no facts, no stats, NOTHING. Just your beliefs. So see, THERES the real fucking problem. We point out some solid facts and stats, then there are the naysayers who just automatically dismiss the claims, with no reasonable doubt. Ive repeadetly said numerous times that it is ignorant to be closed minded either way regarding the global warming controversy.

co2 is 38 parts per million, a trace element,and it's effect is logrithmic. you have to quadruple co2 to get a double of whatever effect it supposedly is having

There is still an effect...

[kronus]

Repeatedly.

At this entire thread.

[Hallen]

What has been misinformed... prove anything I said otherwise...

Ya see, there's the problem.

Some wacko throws out a completely unverified, untestable, unprovable "theory" and then dares the world to "prove it wrong". It really can't be done. (see "proving the negative", ie, you can't prove that extraterrestrials don't exist so therefore they exist)

That is exactly what created this global warming hysteria in the first place (and the ice age scam in the 70's). There was no real science behind it at all, but there is enough mumbojumbo for the media to latch onto that it sounds like it makes sense.

You must accept that the global warming thing was just a political maneuver by environmental extremists to help push their agendas forward faster. Veganism, no fossil fuels, all organic food, communal living, no shaving, technology adverse, economically retarded, self sacrificing bull crap. They can't get what they want in their lifetimes so they created something that would drive the changes they want faster. It's simple.

I am not saying that we should indiscriminately pollute the earth, but global warming is not good science and never was.

[Pinepig]

i forgot the r!!!!!!

You'll never make it as a pirate, Arrrrrrrrrrgh.