Global Warming is over.

[Schnitzer318is]

Ahhhh... P&R. Home of the blind and deaf.

[BraveUlysses]

the world is greener than it has been in recorded history

lol

[Wschnitz]

the world is greener than it has been in recorded history

???

[gwb72tii]

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

lol yourself to sleep brave

also interesting to note, on a different subject, that retreating glaciers in Alaska (was just there) are uncovering tree stumps

[BraveUlysses]

hmm this is one of these cases where george only read the headline

While rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the air can be beneficial for plants, it is also the chief culprit of climate change. The gas, which traps heat in Earth’s atmosphere, has been increasing since the industrial age due to the burning of oil, gas, coal and wood for energy and is continuing to reach concentrations not seen in at least 500,000 years. The impacts of climate change include global warming, rising sea levels, melting glaciers and sea ice as well as more severe weather events.

[Wschnitz]

Its actually a pretty interesting read.

It isn't that there are more plants then ever before, its that the trees and plants we do have are becoming more lush with leaves and storing more CO2 as a result of its abundance in the atmosphere.

[cheffy30]

not to worry boys, the earth will be here at least for another 5 billion years...

[gwb72tii]

hmm this is one of these cases where george only read the headline

no I read the entire article. NASA is on record as an alarmist organization despite the fact there is no proof CO2 is driving whatever short term warming trend we are currently in, within a longer term cooling trend since the Holocene.

here is some context for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record#/media/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png

[gwb72tii]

Its actually a pretty interesting read.

It isn't that there are more plants then ever before, its that the trees and plants we do have are becoming more lush with leaves and storing more CO2 as a result of its abundance in the atmosphere.

And part of the collective challenge is relying on statistics to tell us anything, as if the statistics are accurrate.

http://projectearth.us/there-are-8-times-more-trees-on-earth-than-we-thought-1796423350

and

https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/more-trees-than-there-were-100-years-ago-its-true

[gwb72tii]

One more article that i ran accross that was interesting and I'm done for a while.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/348407-volcanoes-and-the-ozone-are-missing-from-the-climate?inf_contact_key=e57e93a0819a5945556ac10ead81f6f1d9180cabd8f179d74cee2e8f7ec8352c

and a quote from the article:

"As Steven Chu, Nobel laureate and former Secretary of Energy, put it, “the final arbitrator of any point of view are experiments that seek the unbiased truth.”

How could carbon dioxide have become so important scientifically, economically, and politically without greenhouse-warming theory ever having been verified by experiment, a cornerstone of the scientific method?

I have now completed experiments showing that air with more than 23-times normal concentrations of carbon dioxide is heated no more than 0.2 degrees more than normal air when exposed to the same infrared radiation. Air with more than 10-times normal concentrations of carbon dioxide covered Earth 400 million years ago when ice ages were common."

[BraveUlysses]

and yet somehow you're still just cherry picking the parts of these articles you like and ignoring the rest

http://projectearth.us link:

“We’ve nearly halved the number of trees on the planet, and we’ve seen the impacts on climate and human health as a result,” he said. “This study highlights how much more effort is needed if we are to restore healthy forests worldwide."

how do you rationalize insanely stupid comments like this:

the world is greener than it has been in recorded history

and yet ignore entire sets of data that say otherwise?



lol just stop george

[BraveUlysses]

lol again at posting op-eds to bolster your claims

[cale]

The bigger problem is he thinks the planet completely going green is a good thing. It's not a matter of snapping our fingers and having optimal growing conditions all across the globe, that's not how it works.

[Schnitzer318is]

gwb72tii, I don't know you from Adam... but it would be interesting to meet you and get some context to go along with your... we'll call them "out there" views. Some of the stuff you post just blows my mind.

not to worry boys, the earth will be here at least for another 5 billion years...

How much of that time will be inhabitable by humans... we can only guess. One thing is for certain though. There will be life on Earth until the day the sun swallows it. We won't be here, but there will be life.

[gwb72tii]

gwb72tii, I don't know you from Adam... but it would be interesting to meet you and get some context to go along with your... we'll call them "out there" views. Some of the stuff you post just blows.

Having a beer with others that don't see the world as I do is always worthwhile if one can disagree in a civil way.

You wouldn't know this but I was a mechanical/hydraulic engineer at one time. I now help people in finance/retirement finance and investing. One of my challenges in finance is that unlike engineering, logic has little to do with investing. That is why I love it, every day is different and a challenge.

The AGW crowd is for the most part driven by politics and not by science. Disagree with the likes of Gore and Mann and you are shouted down and insulted. There is no such thing as consensus in science as wierd as that sounds. There are theories that are accepted until proven to be no longer be true (ulcers). There is no logic/data that supports CO2 as the driver of warming. And before Brave gets started, all of what I am saying is available online for anyone that cares to look.

The entire AGW argument comes down to models that are supposed to predict climate in the future. Ice cores etc. do not validate the models. CO2 is a greenhouse gas but has never been the driver of global warming historically (ice core data and CO2 lag after warming). Michael Mann's hockey stick has been proven, beyond argument, to be a joke, yet is perhaps the most influential piece of crap ever dreamed up. Yet you ask the USA to regress technically, permanently curse 3rd world economies to poverty all on an unproven hypothesis that man and his CO2 is the problem.

There is warming, has been for a long time, long before we started emitting large amounts of CO2. Al Gore, Mann are in the movement for money and fame. None of their predictions have come to be. I'm thinking the logic dictates being a skeptic.