UN: Global warming 95% likely to be manmade
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Sounds more like a bunch of bloated gasbags trying to protect their gravytrain and the super gullible like mf are buying it. With our money of course.
Dump the UN would be a good idea.
Dump the UN would be a good idea.
We should bear in mind that the UN is simply communicating a message based on the science. If you want to prove BS on their part, as a skeptic, then you need to find some kind of misrepresentation on their behalf.
But as an AGW proponent, I guess I shouldn't be doing the skeptic's job for them, should I?
(oh.. that's I got here.. oh right.. lol)
But as an AGW proponent, I guess I shouldn't be doing the skeptic's job for them, should I?
(oh.. that's I got here.. oh right.. lol)
Climate change denial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think it's a sickness.. it can be cured..
I think it's a sickness.. it can be cured..
NASA Time-lapse Satelite Imagery of Arctic Ice Cap Melt - YouTubeGlobal warming 95% likely to be manmade
....declare the people that have jobs that depend on it.
Meanwhile, Arctic ice hits 35 year high point.
Antarctic sea ice hit 35-year record high Saturday
Predicted hurricane disasters fail to materialize.
Why There Haven't Been Any Hurricanes So Far | TIME.com
And the world has not warmed since 1998.
Forgive me if I am unimpressed.
You mean Antarctic, not Arctic. And as for the Antarctic, there is a well known phenomenon called the Antarctic polar vortex that disrupts the poleward flow of heat from the tropics. The vortex is also the cause of much of the southern hemisphere ozone depletion. Feel free to Google any of this which is news to you.
While you're learning about climate change with Google, pay special attention to the magnitude of change in the Arctic, versus the Antarctic. You should also learn something about why a hemisphere with more land like the Northern hemisphere is more susceptible than a hemisphere with more ocean like the Southern hemisphere.
Really? The world includes oceans, not just the thin layer of air above the surface of land masses:
The world is still warming, it's being absorbed into that great shock absorber, the global ocean.
You've been fed great lies.
You're right, I was wrong....it was the Antarctic, obviously.
But here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/21/s...-but-long-term-decline-may-continue.html?_r=0
Kinda hard to swallow global warming when ice caps are growing on both caps..............
And all you have for proof is weather? What was to blame 100 yeas ago when the 100 year storm hit last time or the time before that? Too many sail boats? Buffalo farts? Pioneers making too many pickled beets to survive the winter in their sod huts? A Nikola Tesla weather machine?
In the deep where it doesn't do anything to alter climate? Are all the viperfish going to die and start a catastrophic chain reaction that kills a butterfly with a hockey stick?
From the same experts who never saw this coming. It's ice but it's not ice that's growing but declining because of this spring's weather. Cute. They blame weather. I hope next spring doesn't drag on for an extra month setting record lows through April and into May across the northern hemisphere but it was probably just weather.
from link said:
Last edited:
Petros, all your blow hard BS.. if someone said the sun comes up in the morning you would say NO it doesn't just to argue.
It doesn't come up. The earth rotates. I never thought that would be news to you but alas, I gave you far too much credit.
It's not BS sunshine. It is how things work.
It's not BS sunshine. It is how things work.
Correction: The UN has been communicating a message based on flawed science... Even they have been forced to recognize that.
With this in mind, it is up to them to prove a position rather than perpetually issuing endless press releases of their opinions.
did you buy that horse yet? or are you still transporting your kids around in that gas guzzling suv ?
No sushi for you.
Has anyone tried farming blue fin tuna on land?
Good they should start by shutting themselves and their families down as an example.It would be quick and virtually painless don't you know.
Nothing that the AGW industry sais can be trusted. We are dealing here with a trace element that throughout the biological history of the earth has been formed by combustion, respiration, fermentation and other geological processes. Is regularly recycled through photosynthesis which frees the oxygen. Not only is the amount of C02 in the atmosphere miniscule but the human contribution of that trace is infintessimal.
This is a list of the suspended carbon in oceans, land biomass and atmosphere. It accounts for over 40,000 billion tons, all in some form of continuous circulation and combination such as C02. of which a grand total of 6 billion tons can be said to be of human origins. And of course carbon itself is a fractional element of the total atmosphere, about .039%, that's 4 parts per 10,000 of other elements."The oceans contain 37,400 billion tons (GT) of suspended carbon, land biomass has 2000-3000 billion tons.
The atmosphere contains 720 billion tons of CO2 and humans contribute only 6 billion tons (accounting for all of the human contribution to suspended carbon). The oceans, land and atmosphere exchange CO2 continuously so the additional load by humans is incredibly small. A small shift in the balance between oceans and air would cause a much more severe rise than anything we could produce."
Do the math.. you are being lied to.. and it should scare you what the agenda is of people who would concoct such a massive con job. It has to do with money.. in carbon credits.. in market manipulation and free trade... and in pure irrational evil, by those who hate everything human.. and are besotted with greed and corruption.
This is a list of the suspended carbon in oceans, land biomass and atmosphere. It accounts for over 40,000 billion tons, all in some form of continuous circulation and combination such as C02. of which a grand total of 6 billion tons can be said to be of human origins. And of course carbon itself is a fractional element of the total atmosphere, about .039%, that's 4 parts per 10,000 of other elements."The oceans contain 37,400 billion tons (GT) of suspended carbon, land biomass has 2000-3000 billion tons.
The atmosphere contains 720 billion tons of CO2 and humans contribute only 6 billion tons (accounting for all of the human contribution to suspended carbon). The oceans, land and atmosphere exchange CO2 continuously so the additional load by humans is incredibly small. A small shift in the balance between oceans and air would cause a much more severe rise than anything we could produce."
Do the math.. you are being lied to.. and it should scare you what the agenda is of people who would concoct such a massive con job. It has to do with money.. in carbon credits.. in market manipulation and free trade... and in pure irrational evil, by those who hate everything human.. and are besotted with greed and corruption.
Last edited:
We already have it in the form of molten salt reactors running on the thorium fuel cycle in the slow neutron spectrum and fast spectrum MSRs running on the uranium fuel cycle. We could power the entire world for a year on about 10,000 tons of thorium, which is about how many tons of coal an average sized power plant will burn in 12 hours. You can also use electricity to make synthetic fuel from air. Uranium and thorium supplies are virtually limitless, with the identified reserves already giving us thousands of years of energy at current levels.
Canada already has extensive experience with working with thorium in CANDUs, but instead of developing safe, relatively clean and efficient nuclear power we've helped the Chinese with their thorium program. Fossil fuels aren't the future nuclear power is despite what idiots are claiming about Fukushima. Even modern PWRs like the AP-1000 and ESBWR are a better bet than vast and highly destructive fossil fuel projects.
Ice is three dimensional not two, the single year ice may be better this year but the ice cap itself on average is less than half as thick as it was 30 years ago. A decade of record single year ice may replace what's been lost.
Hurricanes are the result of complex conditions coming together from across the globe, for instance Atlantic hurricanes begin as atmospheric depressions in Eastern Africa. Strong wind blowing NE off of the Sahara can help prevent the development of hurricanes by putting a lot of dust into the air which acts to cool the ocean surface which is where a hurricane gets it energy. Also on strong El Nino years prevailing winds that usually blow to the west at northern subtropical latitudes can reverse and blow east at high level preventing the kind of high altitude cloud buildup that is necessary to create the feedback that leads to a hurricane developing. Warmer waters are just one element in hurricane development.
The warming trend has slowed due to a number of factors including the lowest solar sunspot activity on record, and we still set a number of record warm years in the 15 years since 1998 which was a very strong El Nino year.
It's a steady progress, not one big jump. By the time you and many people are finally convinced it will be too late to do anything about it. What are you waiting for anyway, the evidence is there in the temperature increases, changes in the timing of the season, loss of ice cover globally, increase in extreme weather events, thermal expansion of the oceans and more.
It's not an industry, it's baseline science. The same physical theories that allow us modern electronics, material science, and more are the basis of understanding radiative forcing of the atmosphere by the increase of compounds like CO2 that act to slow the transmission of longwave radiation into space. And while CO2 is a trace compound, it also plays a key role in moderating the climate, the planet wouldn't be warm enough to support complex life it wasn't there. The issue now is how fast we're increasing the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere and the ability of natural systems to compensate. Right now a lot of the CO2 is going into the oceans, but as it also known as carbonic acid it's also making oceans more acidic with serious consequences for lifeforms there. Considering that oceans are one of the main sources of oxygen and food on planet, this issue alone is troubling.
As I said, carbon dioxide is an acid, the ocean have already become much more acidic due to the release of billions of tons of CO2 a year by human activity.
Ocean Acidification -- National Geographic
And while CO2 may only make up a small part of the atmosphere, it isn't transparent to longwave radiation as molecular nitrogen and oxygen the main components are. The issue is how much additional longwave radiation gets absorbed and re-radiated back to the Earth's surface as we increase the concentration of CO2. The physical principles are pretty clear that it doesn't take much CO2 to cause dramatic shifts in climate.
We've put several hundred billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere over the least 200 or so years, it becomes part of the carbon cycle and doesn't simply disappear. Much of it will still be cycling through the system hundreds and possibly thousands of years from now. It's the cumulative affect that is at issue, not one year in isolation.
The system has been in relative balance until recently, it's the human forcing causing the current shifts in the system.
The math says that if you continuously add a strong absorber of longwave Em radiation into the atmosphere the entire system will warm up resulting in climate change. The basic physics are clear and the real world evidence backs it up.
What you're describing is becoming close to flat Earth nonsense.
Screw your nuclear power. There is enough geo-thermal energy between 1.5 to 3 km into the earth to supply limitless power and heat for, well , forever. Nobody is yet interested in developing the technology to make is cost-efficient and viable on a large scale.
You still haven't said how you will replace my $100,000 for 6-7 months work though, and until you do I support natural gas & oil and fracking. :smile:
Yep, a steady process....of 30 year heating & cooling cycles over the last few thousand years. Sometimes it gets a little warmer, sometimes a little cooler but it always cycles at around 30 years which happens to coincide with orbital anomalies. The only evidence presented is a fear campaign in order to further control freedoms or had you not noticed in places with communist leaders or other non-democratic places there is no such thing as global warming.
Geothermal is best in areas of seismic activity, and is also associated with accelerating it. Not a good combination.
How Does Geothermal Drilling Trigger Earthquakes?: Scientific American
That's your responsibility not mine.
The energy is there in the form of fissile and fertile elements that can be burned in MSRs to provide ample and effectively limitless power without driving the global climate into unsustainable regions. The new economy that developing large scale nuclear power would create would have opportunities that simply aren't available relying on the volatile and limited fossil fuel supply.
Fossil fuel developments can have serious and permanent negative consequences as we're seeing across the globe. It's not about a limited number of people getting rich while the rest of us are expected to pick up the eventual bill, it's about what works best for individual and common needs.
That's the industry generated spin, an industry you seem to be part of. The objective evidence says that climate change is real, it's serious and it us driving most of it. The subjective view of some people who refuse to accept that change is needed possibly because it affects their limited self-interest is it's not happening, it's not serious and it just couldn't be us.
What will you do to make amends if you are totally wrong? If i am wrong it does not matter because i can do f-all anyway. I doubt that a lot of whining on an internet forum will move heaven and earth:lol:
So did the room cool down, heat up or stay the same temperature?
Governments that limit fishing outside their 200 mile limits will simply be replaced by governments with no such policy in place.