Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
- Status
Thank-you. Which one should I believe? Here's another one I just found. http://motls.blogspot.com/2008/01/2007-warmest-year-on-record-coldest-in.html
Man, I've written pages about this already. So, I'll be quick.
Thousands of reputable scientists the world over versus a weatherman.
I'm not sure why one would feel that Oil Companies need their help, but honestly, mankind's contribution to global warming has been proven. We are reaping what we sow. I'm not going to list any sources just as I'm not going to try to convince you that the Earth revolves around the Sun. There's enough on the internet validating Global Warming. And then, of course, there's the few macho, renegade loudmouth skeptics
Global warming skeptics will hear one or two things, and then just to have an opinion, loudly and with much brashness utter those two things they've read just to bolster their ego.
If you care to step away from your partisanship, do some reading on the other side. Watch an "Inconvenient Truth" and "the Denial Machine"
The media has to maintain it's sense at best of maintaing balance. So, when some renegade weatherman wants a soundbite claiming that Global Warmingis a farce (and that he comes from the Planet Kludo), they'll give it to him.
But when thousands (literally) of scientists, the world over come to agree that
(i)we are causing, and can reverse global warming
(ii)the effects of global warming, understanding will be disastrous
Even you, my friend, I'm sure can be level headed enough to weigh the intellectual balance....
Thousands of reputable scientists the world over versus a weatherman
Thousands of reputable scientists the world over versus a weatherman.
I'm not sure why one would feel that Oil Companies need their help, but honestly, mankind's contribution to global warming has been proven. We are reaping what we sow. I'm not going to list any sources just as I'm not going to try to convince you that the Earth revolves around the Sun. There's enough on the internet validating Global Warming. And then, of course, there's the few macho, renegade loudmouth skeptics
Global warming skeptics will hear one or two things, and then just to have an opinion, loudly and with much brashness utter those two things they've read just to bolster their ego.
If you care to step away from your partisanship, do some reading on the other side. Watch an "Inconvenient Truth" and "the Denial Machine"
The media has to maintain it's sense at best of maintaing balance. So, when some renegade weatherman wants a soundbite claiming that Global Warmingis a farce (and that he comes from the Planet Kludo), they'll give it to him.
But when thousands (literally) of scientists, the world over come to agree that
(i)we are causing, and can reverse global warming
(ii)the effects of global warming, understanding will be disastrous
Even you, my friend, I'm sure can be level headed enough to weigh the intellectual balance....
Thousands of reputable scientists the world over versus a weatherman
And some of them say the climate is warming, and some of them say carbon dioxide is part of the cause, and some of them think no warming at all from carbon dioxide, and some of them say there is no warming, and some of them think that any money spent on mitigation will be fruitless. The common thread? They all think we should spend no money at all on fixing the problem, indeed they are not of one mind on if there is a problem. There certainly is a weak consensus on their part. So the one common opinion by them is not a scientific position, but a political position. Speaks volumes...
The term "geologic time scale" only means that we are referring to an immensely long time frame. Just because it isn't of a fixed duration doesn't mean it can't compare. After all, a human time scale is also not of a fixed length.
But you do have a point. Such geologic time scales are so extensive that the little blip that represents our existence is insignificant. Perhaps it's a matter of using the wrong semantics. After all, the topic at hand is the imminent return of an ice age which has a 100,000 yr. rotation, considerably less than the geologic time frames you mentioned.
Yes, I know, you mentioned that before. I contend that there is such evidence. That's what we're discussing.
As would be expected until the next ice age actually begins. I didn't say that it was here, just that it was coming soon.
Really?8O They predicted it would grow? I always thought they said it would melt.
Due to unusual winds that moved it into currents that took it south. And not necessarily the smallest ever, they've only been measuring since 1978, the tail end of a 30 year cooling, so the decrease would be expected.
And this winters sea ice cover is greater than any time since 1980, right close to the end of that 30 year cooling. And 20% thicker than last year as well. Not to mention that Antarctic sea ice cover last winter was greater than ever measured before.
Your mistake is in using current trends to extrapolate an event that may not arrive for 10, 100 or even 1000 years. You won't find them predictive until the actual event occurs. My contention is that based on past events and patterns, we're due.
One weatherman????
www.climatescienceinternational.org
Al Gore was invited to speak at the conference. They even offered his standard $200,000 fee. He refused.
For all intents and purposes, it is, in comparison to geologic boundaries.
It's not insignificant on our scales, which is the whole point.
So, again I'll ask for that evidence, as I have a few times already.
That's a pretty brave assumption. Do you know what the forcing was that caused the shift from warming to ice age? Is it more or less than our anthropogenic forcing?
Nope. That only enforces the idea if a lie is told often enough, people will accept it as truth. In 1980, Martin I. Hoffert, et al. found that more water, such as the Southern ocean, would delay the warming response by decades. Then in 1981, Stephen H. Schneider and S.L. Thompson found that the delay would be longer than initially thought, that if we only used simple equilibrium models, that we would still be mislead in this decade(2000-2010). Then in 1988, Kirk Bryan et al. showed that there would be a slight cooling for 50 years, even while the rest of the planet warms. The models since then have all found the same thing, though with some changes. The models have, for instance, predicted that the Western Antarctic peninsula would warm. It's actually the fastest warming location on the planet.
So now changing winds aren't to be expected, even though climate is long term weather patterns? Funny, the predictions have mentioned changing wind patterns. Sea surface temperatures were also warmer that summer. But it does appear to be anomalous. That happens with seasonal weather
Again, two anomolies back to back. The overall trend is still one of decreasing Arctic ice, and increasing Antarctic ice.
One thousand years away, could be even longer than that. Funny though how your ilk has suggested that current trends mean we're switching to a cooling phase, despite the long term trends.
Major Highlights
NOAA: Coolest December-February Since 2001 for U.S., Globe
The average temperature across both the contiguous U.S. and the globe during December 2007-February 2008 (climatological boreal winter) was the coolest since 2001, according to scientists at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. In terms of winter precipitation, Pacific storms bringing heavy precipitation to large parts of the West produced high snowpack that will provide welcome runoff this spring.
If global warming is a myth, I want the Pentagon's budget to be reduced and to have all tax monies for its gw related program to be refunded.
Icebergs Melting, Seals Disappearing, Arctic Warming
by <A href="http://amerpundit.com/">AmerPundit |
This just in from the Washington Post:
That was one of the original alarms, before people decided the problem was actually global cooling, then all of a sudden again decided the problem is warming. How long before the next man-made global warming/cooling scare changes?
“No, seriously! We’re sure this time…uh, we think.”
1922. Must’ve been the year of the SUV.
by <A href="http://amerpundit.com/">AmerPundit |
This just in from the Washington Post:
The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway.
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.
Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
Wait a second…Huh. Upon further review, that article is from November 2nd…1922. Yeah, as in 86 years ago and counting.Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.
Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
That was one of the original alarms, before people decided the problem was actually global cooling, then all of a sudden again decided the problem is warming. How long before the next man-made global warming/cooling scare changes?
“No, seriously! We’re sure this time…uh, we think.”
1922. Must’ve been the year of the SUV.
... and we've been paying taxes to finance those reports just like we do with the Pentagon?
I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!!
I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!!
- Status