How the GW myth is perpetuated

[typingrandomstuff]

My guardiens (I mean gods and goddesses). It's another case of popular science. At this rate, there will be no knowledge. Thank the guardiens debating people are not part of the elite and secret society of elites. Most elites and secret society of elites decides the major facts and opinion. Just in case. I will be more specific. Here I am typing some random stuff to keep Hitler-like people logical. The critics do not want truth or dare. Yes, global warming is temporary.

Most people are not convinced of global warming. It does not mean the whole entire process is global warming. The weather is becoming warm in some times, while colder in the others. The main reasons are: earth's magnetic flip, the sun's changing cycles, and the people's industrial waste. The excess gases provide a heat capacity for heat. When the magnetic flip is finished, earth will then cool. Since the earth is cooling anyhow, some people thought it will cool. Truthfully, it will be hot in the least expected times. Cold in the least expected times.

Again, wear cloth that have a four seasons usage. Always pack excess jackets, sweater, shoes and boots. If 2030's weather is nuts, please also pack first aid kit, a stick, a hook, and a flat strip of metal. Compass will be useless. The sun's ray will be useless due to the overpollution of toxic gases. Don't depend heavily on photovoltaics. Depend somewhat on thermovoltaics, and gagets that uses the sinking cold air as energy. Have excess water along the way. An oxygen tank may be needed.

 

[typingrandomstuff]

Overloading a discussion. Dear guardiens!

 

[typingrandomstuff]

I was not clear about the case of popular science. Most scientists searches for fame and some games in their experiments. Notice, their process to obtain their knowledge is experiments. They experiment with a part of the nature. Most of the findings reveal only a part of the whole truth. One part of the whole truth is a partial fact. When the group of scientists decide it's true, then it is a scientific fact.

Most people respect scientists, however people also ignores the scientists' errors. If a person does not ignore some of the scientists errors, the person will be more confused.

Politics sometimes accept facts that are wrong. This is to make the politicians feel content. I don't care what. If you want to know the difference between truth and lies, you have to observe, predict, and think about the universes.

 

[typingrandomstuff]

A Part of the Universes

Thank you Chandra Observatory Station of Havard University.

 

[typingrandomstuff]

Also thanks to NASA for the dense blackhole illustration.

 

[typingrandomstuff]

I forgot to describe the elite secret society. The elite secret society may be like robinhood's gang or the gang of mafias. Normally, the good elite secret society's members are seperate. I have no idea who they are except I heard about it on the internet. The bad ones are small influencial gangs in places like Chicagos. They were the Illuminati. Now, I don't know who they are. The Illuminati related elite secret societies are restricted as well. Once the members of the society become most corrupt, they will automatically be eliminated by normal people.

 

[Tonington]

50% of Canadians have no voice in Ottawa on this matter.

Of course we don't, but the number is larger. Close to 65% of Canadians voted for someone besides the governing party.

 

[L Gilbert]

Flat Earthers are a comical bunch.

 

[Walter]

Close to 65% of Canadians voted for someone besides the governing party.

Most of them have Jack or Stephan to speak for them. Non-AGW believers have no one at present and we represent over half of the popuulation.

 

[Tonington]

Most of them have Jack or Stephan to speak for them. Non-AGW believers have no one at present and we represent over half of the popuulation.

Half of an internet forum population...and it's not half that don't believe the cause, it's over half that are non-believers and unsure. Of those who do have an opinion, you non-believers still are behind. There's a reason that polls have answers split into more than one category.

 

[Northboy]

Why let facts get in the way?

By FRED WARD

Monday, Jul. 16, 2007
IN JUNE THE New Hampshire Union Leader published a story "At mount (Cannon), talk is about global warming." This article quoted some participants making statements like "winters with less snow and more rain," without specific dates and data. It's difficult to check fuzzy comments like that.
However, there was one data set quoted, "the average winter temperatures in the Northeast have increased 4.4 degrees since 1970," which was a checkable piece of information. These same erroneous data were quoted in the Keene Sentinel last August, but in the context of a 4.4 degree increase in winter temperatures in New England. The Sentinel published my response stating that the actual change in winter temperature in New England, based on all 11 first-order National Weather Service stations in New England, from the early 1970s to the early 2000s, was a whopping two tenths of one degree!
Now we have the very same erroneous number quoted for the Northeast, and it's just as wrong this year as it was last year.
Looking at the same years as previously for New England, but adding three randomly selected stations outside New England but in the Northeast -- Cleveland, Buffalo and Philadelphia -- for the same years (1971-1975 and 2001-2005), the data show that the average winter temperature at Cleveland had actually fallen from 30.2 in the early 1970s to 29.6 in the early 2000s, Buffalo had fallen from 27.2 to 26.9 and Philadelphia from 35.8 to 35.1.
It's unlikely that the weather data from other stations in the northeastern United States would give much different results.
So why do the global warming zealots continue to quote 4.4 degrees?
One has to wonder if any one of "the panel of experts" at the conference knew better. Did he or she speak up to correct such a glaring misstatement of fact?
If the last 30 years show little change, what about climate change over centuries or millennia? Good, worldwide temperature data are available for less than a century, but that hasn't stopped the alarmists from quoting what are called "temperature" data extending back to the Romans. Such data are not temperatures, but proxies which are claimed to measure temperature.
Such proxies include tree rings, ice cores and the like, but they all suffer from one serious limitation. The proxies can be calculated from the weather, but the weather cannot be calculated from the proxies. The brief reason is that many different weather elements work in complex ways to produce the proxy.
Tree rings are a simple case, made thicker or thinner by a combination of autumn and spring rains, sun and temperature. All kinds of combinations of these weather elements can produce a thick ring or a thin ring. But which combination? Was it a lot of sun, or maybe gentle rains, or what? All proxies have similar, but different problems.
A more interesting argument heard in New Hampshire is that the ski areas and the maple syrup industries are hurting because of global warming. Using skis and syrup to make the case that the temperature in New Hampshire has warmed substantially is disingenuous because the actual temperature data for New Hampshire are available. Why would you use ski and syrup data to measure temperature when the temperature data are easy to find?
You could suspect that anyone using the ski and syrup data, rather than the temperature data, has already looked at the actual temperature data and found what I found, little or no warming, so they turned to skis and syrup. Interesting!
Finally, for those of you old enough to read in the 1970s, there was a lot of hysteria back then about the global temperature. The same "if we don't act promptly, in 10 years it will be too late" statements were published, on the covers of reputable papers and magazines, by many of the same "scientists," and for many of the same base motives. The only difference between the 1970s and now was that the disaster that was just around the corner was global cooling!
How times change, while people don't.
Is it global warming, political warming or globaloney?
Fred Ward of Stoddard has a Ph.D. in meteorology from MIT

To my mind the "How" is less important than the why...

Moving to a green based post modern agricultural society is as much a make work and new skill development project than anything....or that's what it could lead to.

Academics and their blathering are becoming a pain in the arse, standing in the way of proper development and economic deployment....All in an attempt to grab research dollars for research into lazy issues, a low hanging fruit kind of thing....

We still have to fix the planet though, and figure out how to ration finite resources, whatever excuse the academics and media feed into the system....

 

[Walter]

A Desperate Man

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, June 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Radicalism: In another example of junk science run amok, NASA scientist James Hansen wants oil executives put on trial for giving "misinformation" about his global warming theory. Is this where society is headed?

If so, we are headed for a dangerous place. Only in totalitarian systems is dissent a criminal offense.
Hansen, who 20 years ago Monday cranked up the global warming scare with his congressional testimony, is a clever promoter. By fusing his pseudo science with the wild-eyed efforts of eco-activists, media dupes and pandering politicians, he's been able to convince the public that his flawed theory is actually holy writ.
Out of this has emerged a madness that has divided Westerners into "us," the believers, and "them," the skeptics who are looked down upon as socially irresponsible reprobates.

That's not enough for Hansen, though. He now wants to ratchet his machine up a few notches.
Put the oil men on trial, he says, because it's "a crime" for them to "have been putting out misinformation" that places doubt on his unproved — and unprovable — premise that man's use of fossil fuels is warming Earth.
We wonder: Will it be up to NASA's secret police to make the arrests that will be necessary to drag these men before the tribunal?
Al Gore, the most famous face of the global warming-industrial complex, has been saying for years that the debate is over, that science has declared humans are responsible for climate change.
He, of course, is wrong. There are skeptics in the scientific community, literally thousands of them.
Many are on the leash, however, afraid to speak out for fear of being bullied, denied research grants and ostracized for expressing politically incorrect doubt. For them, the debate is indeed over.
Those who refuse to be browbeaten, though, are in danger of seeing their careers ruined or, perhaps someday, sharing a prison cell with the oil executives Hansen wants to try.
Criminalize dissent: That's one way to ensure the debate is over.
Hansen's comment is revealing. It's the sort of declaration made by a desperate man trying to hang on to his declining relevance.
Hansen knows the climate of fear he has stoked is receding as more people start to see through his nonsense. He's just trying to stir up some storm clouds.

 

[eanassir]

The global warming is in progress.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080627/sc_livescience/northpolecouldbeicefreethissummer
And see our link:
The earth approaches the sun


eanassir
http://universeandquran.site.io​

 

[typingrandomstuff]

Egad. That will be years later. North Pole could be ice free this summer is due to the magnetic flip and the sun's cycle. Plus people just don't care and it's going to be warm.

 

[L Gilbert]

The earth is flat and tomatoes are poisonous and the universe was created in 7 days. lmao

 

[eanassir]

Egad. That will be years later. North Pole could be ice free this summer is due to the magnetic flip and the sun's cycle. Plus people just don't care and it's going to be warm.

No sunspots now as do they say.
This has nothing to do with "they care" or care not.

 

[L Gilbert]

No sunspots now as do they say...........

Among other things.

 

[eanassir]

The earth is flat and tomatoes are poisonous and the universe was created in 7 days. lmao

All these words are wrong; but the truth is: the earth is not flat; tomato is not poisonous and the universe was not created in 7 days.
​

• The earth is not flat: it is spherical according to "the Quran 39: 5

خَلَقَ السّماواتِ و الأرْضَ بِالحَقِّ يُكَوِّرُ اللّيْلَ عَلى النّهارِ و يُكَوِّرُ النَّهارَ عَلَى اللّيْلِ و سَخَّرَ الشّمْسَ و القَمَرَ كُلٌّ يَجْرِي لأجَلٍ مُسَمّىً ألا هُوَ العَزِيزُ الغَفّارُ​

The explanation: (He created the heavens and the earth with the true [promise]*; He makes the night spherical on the day, and makes the day spherical on the night; and He subjected the sun and the moon: each running on for an appointed term; surely, He is the All-Mighty, the All-Forgiving!)
[* i.e. with the true promise of destruction and ruining on Doomsday.]
The interpretation:
The word يُكَوِّرُ i.e. (makes spherical)
Now, dear reader, look carefully to the eloquence and clear language of the Quran. Look carefully and think how the Glorious God has declared the sphericity of the Earth, its rotation around itself, the transferring of sunrays upon it and the formation of the day and night, by His saying -be exalted –

يُكَوِّرُ اللّيْلَ عَلى النّهارِ و يُكَوِّرُ النَّهارَ عَلَى اللّيْلِ​

i.e. (He makes the night spherical on the day, and makes the day spherical on the night.)
The Glorious God said يُكَوِّرُ i.e. (makes spherical) because the earth is spherical in shape, so the sunrays will spread on half of the sphere so that the day will be on its lightened side, while the night will be in the dark side, then the sunrays will transfer to the other side because of the rotation of the Earth, so that the position of the night will become day, and the position of the day will become night. Therefore, the sunrays get a spherical shape around the Earth, and give it light and heat, and the day and night will result from that.
Then again look carefully, dear reader, to this word and think about its meaning. Can any human being be able to give a synonym of it? Or can he express in such [few] words all this information and knowledge?
This word, alone, suffices as a proof of the truthfulness of Mohammed –peace be on him – and a proof of the existence of a Creator for the universe; because the sphericity of the Earth was unknown to people until the present time[ the Quran was revealed more than 1400 years ago], and this knowledge and statement have not been discovered and become a reality except in these present days."

http://universeandquran.site.io/new_page_3.htm#A_miracle_of_the_Quran:_the_authentic_word_of_God
​

• Tomatoes are not poisonous; unless they are touched by an atheist or associater or idolater or disbeliever; because his sweat is filth, and such tomatoes will be filth unless cleaned with water with mentioning God's name.

​

• The universe was not created in 7 days; the earth and the rest of the solar system planets together with their gaseous layers of their atmospheres; all this was created transformed from one state to another) in 6 days.

This is in the Quran 32: 4

اللهُ الّذي خَلَقَ السماواتِ والأرضَ و ما بينَهُما في ستّةِ أيّامٍ ثُمّ اسْتَوَى على العرشِ ... ​

The explanation: (It is God Who created the heavens and the earth and that which is between them in six [of the] days [of the Hereafter.] Then He mounted the throne …)
‘The heavens and the earth’ means the planets. And "that which is between them" means the moons. And six days means six thousand years, during which the planets were transformed into earths after being one flaming sun, and during this period: the gaseous layers of the atmosphere were created.
http://universeandquran.site.io/#Formation_of_the_Earth
http://universeandquran.site.io/#The_Gaseous_Heavens


eanassir

http://universeandquran.site.io​

 

[L Gilbert]

lmao You are a funny sort, EA. Have you not heard of sarcasm?
2 definitions; the one applicable to my previous post is 2a:

Main Entry: sar·casm Pronunciation: \ˈsär-ˌka-zəm\ Function: noun Etymology: French or Late Latin; French sarcasme, from Late Latin sarcasmos, from Greek sarkasmos, from sarkazein to tear flesh, bite the lips in rage, sneer, from sark-, sarx flesh; probably akin to Avestan thwarəs- to cut Date: 1550 1: a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain
2 a: a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual b: the use or language of sarcasm

BTW, I don't read scriptures from holy books anymore. That joke has gone stale on me.

 

[Stretch]

[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]North America's first carbon tax rolls out under fire [/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]'Civic leader Scott Nelson says he is as worried as anyone about global warming, but that does not make him happy to be one of the first North Americans to pay a carbon tax to curb climate change. Nelson, the mayor of Williams Lake, British Columbia, says record high energy prices mean that the levy, for all its good intentions, could not come at a worse time for residents in his community, a small lumber and ranching town about 525 km (340 miles) north of Vancouver.'[/FONT]
A 'carbon tax' to 'save the earth' from climate change which is NOT caused by carbon emissions. Yeah, makes sense. This is not about the climate, it is about control. and justifying still more taxation of people to fund the building of their own prison.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2537887720080627





Study finds Arctic seabed afire with lava-spewing volcanoes​

Study finds Arctic seabed afire with lava-spewing volcanoes...

Posted Jun 27, 2008 02:28 PM PST
Category: SCIENCE/HEALTH

​

So, it isn't your SUV that melted the polar ice cap. And by the way, even though the ice cap is supposed to be all but gone, New York City hasn't been flooded.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=81bb2fd3-63f1-476f-b0be-f48c0dc90304