NASA says Climate Change exagerated?

[CorvallisBMW]

That's just it, they don't have outside motives of money, greed or profit like huge polluters do. They're motive is science, research and the truth. No scientist ever became rich from grant money LOL. To suggest that hundreds of thousands of scientists all over the world invented not only a theory but millions of terabytes of data over the last 30 years, collaborated across disciplines and continents and launched a worldwide propaganda campaign just to procure a few million $ in government grants is the very epitomy of tin-foil-hat conspiracy crackpots.

[gstuning]

Its nice to theorize impossible things when you don't have anything real to fall back on. Increased CO2 = increased temps = more droughts = less food. Plants need water to grow too. C'mon Farmin Kaiber, you should know that :)

Then...

Ice melts due to higher temps into water.

Water rises

Rains falls.

[herbivor]

Then...

Ice melts due to higher temps into water.

Water rises

Rains falls.

That's right. More water is in the atmosphere as a result of melting ice. Water falls creating extreme floods during the spring and extreme blizzards during the winter. Sound familiar? Unfortunately the water doesn't get evenly dispersed and the effects of rising temperatures creates local drier climates too. See Sudan and the American southwest for two examples. Those areas were projected by climate models to become drier as a result of GW. Sudan and Texas may be experiencing a new normal rather than a prolonged drought. "Extreme" weather events have always occurred but they are becoming statistically more and more common.

[Vedubin01]

sounds like America needs to kill more babies and steal more land to prepare for this land shift. oh noes!

[dirtysix]

No scientist ever became rich from grant money LOL.

That may be so but many become famous from grant money.
It isn't only money that motivates.

[Farbin Kaiber]

^And that then opens book sales. And $25,000 speaking events.

The big problem here is the assumption that we as a species are supposed (charged, empowered, responsible) to keep this entire planet locked in exactly as it was before the Industrial Revolution. It's not that simple, this is a dynamic, ever changing "entity" that will still be chugging along when we are no longer here, just as it did before we "came on the scene".

[s0urce]

I didn't need NASA to convince me this political agenda was total bullshit. Hell, even Japanese scientists called bullshit many years ago. But i'm glad we're in the same corner.

[Massimo]

That's right. More water is in the atmosphere as a result of melting ice. Water falls creating extreme floods during the spring and extreme blizzards during the winter. Sound familiar? Unfortunately the water doesn't get evenly dispersed and the effects of rising temperatures creates local drier climates too. See Sudan and the American southwest for two examples. Those areas were projected by climate models to become drier as a result of GW. Sudan and Texas may be experiencing a new normal rather than a prolonged drought. "Extreme" weather events have always occurred but they are becoming statistically more and more common.

Don't forget that warmer water is bad for that global current thing can't think of the name of it at the moment. Anyways I have read that if that stops flowing then we will head strait into another Ice Age. Can someone confirm that I can't even remember where I read it.

Anyways, all this disagreing is annoying, like I always say it dose not matter weather GW is happening or not, at the end of the day goverments and the general public are finnaly happy to accept and embrace a future with out fossil fuels, no matter what you think, this is a turn for the good.

[gwb72tii]

That's just it, they don't have outside motives of money, greed or profit like huge polluters do. They're motive is science, research and the truth. No scientist ever became rich from grant money LOL. To suggest that hundreds of thousands of scientists all over the world invented not only a theory but millions of terabytes of data over the last 30 years, collaborated across disciplines and continents and launched a worldwide propaganda campaign just to procure a few million $ in government grants is the very epitomy of tin-foil-hat conspiracy crackpots.

i have some waterfront i want to sell you

LOL

look up gullible in the dictionary, and you'll see a link to herbivore and corvallis

[CorvallisBMW]

So you're saying anyone who doesn't believe in tinfoil hat worldwide conspiracy theories is gullible? Well, mark me down!

[herbivor]

i have some waterfront i want to sell you

LOL

look up gullible in the dictionary, and you'll see a link to herbivore and corvallis

Seriously, That's your come back to the mountains of data I send you refuting every single statement you make? Two articles you sited to support your side are written by people not having any experience in climatology, working with non-profits funded by big oil or republican politicians with a political agenda. If there is any conspiracy, it's that of big oil trying to buy politicians and pseudo scientists to spread disinformation to idiots like you that will gladly believe it and vote in support of not having to change the way you use energy. You are the gullible one my friend. You only need to visit a few glaciers to understand that something isn't right. I've seen them in Iceland, Alaska and New Zealand. The shits disappearing at a crazy fast rate. Wake the fuck up.

[gwb72tii]

let me guess
you're both educated
and under 30yrs old

[herbivor]

Don't forget that warmer water is bad for that global current thing can't think of the name of it at the moment. Anyways I have read that if that stops flowing then we will head strait into another Ice Age. Can someone confirm that I can't even remember where I read it.

I think you mean the atlantic gulf stream current. They move south to north along the US eastern shore bringing warmer water from the equator up to the north atlantic. It's why the European countries can be at a much higher latitude and still have relatively milder climates. The theory is that meting sea ice from Greenland and the arctic will cool the warmer waters thereby disrupting the convective flow. That will trigger a cooling effect to Europe, essentially making it similar to Canada, creating a positive feedback loop of global cooling due to the reflective qualities of the extra snow and ice that develops there in the winters. It is thought that continual greenhouse effects of burning fossil fuels will overcome the global cooling cycle and "restart" the currents, repeating the cycle cooling to warming until eventually most of the ice from Greenland melts breaking the cycle completely. The range of potential outcomes and their timeline to this effect is currently pretty wide in the models because the data returning is still relatively new and how we would react to such phenomenon is unknown. But initial data is confirming a cooling of the current waters and change in salinity as predicted by the models. More tests and data will allow climatologists to fine tune the models to determine a more accurate prediction on the "ifs" and "whens".

[mrsleeve]

let me guess
you're both educated
and under 30yrs old

winnar winnar chicken Dinnar

Not 100% sure about herbie though, but they both are educated as engineers though

[DTM190]

Geez, I wish my Mrs got this nasty in the bedroom :o