Global Cooling

[gwb72tii]

This is for the all the news that the lamestream media won't print, and the 97% consensus (LOL) can't explain, other than global warming causes cooling (wrap your head around that logic)

#1 Who would have guessed tht in 1975 the 97% consensus was that the globe was cooling? http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

#2 Forbes magazine http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterfer...oling-is-here/


more as I find them

[Kershaw]

lol

[cale]

Definitely worthy of it's own thread.

The comments at least give me a little faith in the types of give scientific articles in a finance rag a fair shot.

[Q5Quint]

Response:

#1 I am going to go out on a limb and say that you just made up a fact, and linked to a article that did not include a fact. An article from 1975. If you don't state where you got your 97% consensus on global cooling you are outright lying.

"Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. “Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data,” concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. “Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions.”"

Why would you even quote an article that has that statement in it? We have learned a lot since 1975~ captain planet came on in 1990 so your 97% consensus must have turned around pretty quick in just 15 years.

#2 The heartland institute? Really? The folks that believe smoking is not harmful to your health?

"Despite criticizing climate scientists for being overconfident about their data, models and theories, the Heartland Institute proclaims a conspicuous confidence in single studies and grand interpretations. A 2009 report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, which the institute supports, is well sourced and based on scientific papers. Yet it makes many bold assertions that are often questionable or misleading, and do not highlight the uncertainties. Many climate sceptics seem to review scientific data and studies not as scientists but as attorneys, magnifying doubts and treating incomplete explanations as falsehoods rather than signs of progress towards the truth”"

I think the first comment on forbes sums it up.

You are entitled to an opinion, but not your own facts. Of the 14,000 recent journal papers, only 24 did not agree that anthropogenic warming is occurring.

The opinions in this piece are contrary to the majority of climate scientists, and Americans as well.

How many times do these 500 or 1000 year weather events have to occur before the light bulb goes off.

In case you haven’t noticed, denialists are a dying breed, and each unusual event is another shovel of dirt on your grave. But, hey, aren’t you the guys that also swore up and down Obama would loose? Everyone else knew it but you.

Or how about the 2nd comment?:

Suggestions that global warming has stalled are a “diversionary tactic” from “deniers” who want the public to be confused over climate change, according to the world’s best-known climate scientist. Prof James Hansen, who first alerted the world to climate change in 1988, said on Friday: “It is not true that the temperature has not changed in the two decades.”

Did you do ANY research AT ALL or did you just cut and paste a website with no sources that happens to have the same view as you?

"Based on NOAA data, the last 15 years -- from 1998 to 2012 -- have included the 14 hottest years on record since 1880 for global temperatures. The NOAA estimates that the hottest year was 2010."

14 hottest years, and yet you keep trying to say the globe is cooling? You have an opinion that you need to back up a little bit better, or you are just plain wrong.

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey...mate-change-g/

The Republican agenda is obviously to keep the fossil fuel industry pumping out billions of dollars in profits off those poor american citizens for as long as possible, I dont know what your agenda is.

[Cabriolet]

Today it is cool out side, i live on the globe therefore, there must be global cooling

[LJ851]

Today it is cool out side, i live on the globe therefore, there must be global cooling

Ironclad Logic.

[BraveUlysses]

And amusingly, stronger logic than any gwb post on this subject

[z31maniac]

My grass is green in August.

Must be global cooling.

[Farbin Kaiber]

The trees are changing color wayyy early here, I'm thinking it's also global cooling, maybe we can have fall in summer, winter for fall, spring for New Years, and summer in the springtime when it's not as hot.

[mrsleeve]

^

On fire does not count as a fall time color change farb. :)

[Farbin Kaiber]

Well, the remnants of the leaves are falling.

[tjts1]

Global Cooling

[Farbin Kaiber]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/23/pruden-up-to-our-ears-in-snake-oil/

PRUDEN: Up to our ears in Al Gore’s ‘climate change’ snake oil

Al Gore and his traveling medicine show is back in town with his new, improved snake oil, guaranteed to grow hair, improve digestion, promote regularity and kill roaches, rats and bedbugs. Al and his wagon rumbled into town on the eve of “a major forthcoming report” from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which is a panel of scientists affiliated with the United Nations. Their report is expected to buck up the spirits of the tycoons of the snake-oil industry.
A snake-oil salesman’s lot, like a policeman’s, is not a happy one. There’s always a skeptic or two (or three) standing at the back of the wagon, eager to scoff and jeer. The global-warming scam would have been right up Gilbert and Sullivan’s street. Would Al and the U.N. deceive us? No! Never! What! Never? Weeeell, hardly ever.

Continues...

[gwb72tii]

glad to see the usual suspects hyperventilating

Mr Q, bringing up James Hansen as a credible source on anything, and dismissing Fred Singer as a skeptic shows your bias. James Hansen is a biased agenda driven psuedo scientist.

more raw data showing no warming, and cooling

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/27/the-200-months-of-the-pause/#more-92466

[Q5Quint]

In science, you try and prove that your hypothesis is wrong, not that it is right.


Can you find any data that proves the world is not cooling?




http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/7#temp

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration July 2013 is the 6th warmest and 129th coolest July on record. The warmest being 1998 and coolest 1911. This data seems to directly oppose your conclusion that the world is 'cooling', since temperatures have been rising since the 1940s and especially after 1980.





Is the conclusion of the whatsupwiththat website that there has been no warming since 1996 incorrect if the warmest temperatures on record have been recorded THIS YEAR in many places around the globe?

Could other factors, such as el nina cycles, atmospheric particulates, solar cycles etc play a role in global climate change and temperature predictions that could lead to small cycles of up and down trends, though the long term conclusion is still total warming?



http://www.skepticalscience.com/glob...termediate.htm


Are you, and people like you, subject to public attitude studies of how people don't believe in studies?

Climate scepticism appeared particularly common among older individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds who are politically conservative and hold traditional values; while it is less common among younger individuals from higher socio-economic backgrounds who hold self-transcendence and environmental values. The finding that climate scepticism is rooted in people's core values and worldviews may imply a coherent and encompassing sceptical outlook on climate change. However, attitudinal certainty appeared mainly concentrated in non-sceptical groups, suggesting that climate sceptical views are not held very firmly.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...59378011000288

Do you believe that only citing non-scientific blog sites and opinion articles from koch-funded conservative think-tanks as 'proof' that anthropogenic climate change is not true lends any credibility at all to your views?

This is the part where I insult you for being a tin-foil hat armageddon prepping loony tea-bagger that garners absolutely no respect from anyone because you follow the pied piper of fox news instead of actually doing any research into fact vs fiction. Don't feel bad~ my parents do it too. Puppets of capitalism and emotion-driven media hype who have yet to learn the fact that you have been lied to your whole life. You really need to branch out and think for yourselves before it is too late and the world is totally screwed for those of us that have to live here after you are gone.

Are you SURE the world is cooling? Because I can find lots of data that says that is not true. Why are you still pushing it and why do you keep citing a blog by a climate skeptic weatherman who is quoted saying that the globe is actually warming, but he does not believe in taxes?

Watts more recently expressed his position as: "Now I'm in the camp of we have some global warming. No doubt about it, but it may not be as bad as we originally thought because there are other contributing factors." He further avers that what most bothers him about scientists and others who claim global warming is serious, is that, "They want to change policy. They want to apply taxes and these kinds of things may not be the actual solution for making a change to our society."[

The reasonable thing would be to say:

'Human-caused climate change is real, though the exact level is still being researched (somewhere between not-a-big-deal to terribly bad) and there are people out there trying to make money off either the promotion of those facts, or the denial of them.'

To say 'the world is cooling' is just plain wrong and people will make fun of you for even suggesting it.