Global Warming….

Post deleted by Gary

Quote:

---

The real problem is:
Scientists who have been saying this for years
are the only ones getting “paid” in research dollars to
provide results proving “global warming” or it’s latest iteration.

---

Is it global warming or climate change?
By the way, how is that ozone hole in the artic circle doing? Aren’t we all suppose to be dead by now because of cosmic radiation?

I still blame the dinosaurs for smoking tobacco that wiped out the species. 2nd hand smoke does kill.

Never let a crisis go to waste: money
Never let a crisis go to waste: power
Never let a crisis go to waste: “See how smart I am”

If you want to be naïve and believe what others tell you about their facts, do what makes you feel better.

Hey, whatever you do to save the planet makes you sleep better at night, go for it! I’ll never condemn it!

Never let a crisis go to waste: money

Never let a crisis go to waste: power

Never let a crisis go to waste: “See how smart I am”

Never let a crisis go to waste: money

Never let a crisis go to waste: power

Never let a crisis go to waste: “See how smart I am”

—insanity: doing the same thing over again and expecting different results—-

Is it getting warmer or colder?

Quote:

---

By the way, how is that ozone hole in the artic circle doing? Aren’t we all suppose to be dead by now because of cosmic radiation?

---

You do know that Reagan signed an international treaty, the Montreal Protocol, that was designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out CFCs that are primarily responsible for ozone depletion, right? The reason that it is no longer as urgent as it was is because we took regulatory action to slow what was causing it. Do you have any other irrelevant quips?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

By the way, how is that ozone hole in the artic circle doing? Aren’t we all suppose to be dead by now because of cosmic radiation?

---

You do know that Reagan signed an international treaty, the Montreal Protocol, that was designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out CFCs that are primarily responsible for ozone depletion, right? The reason that it is no longer as urgent as it was is because we took regulatory action to slow what was causing it. Do you have any other irrelevant quips?

---

Oh, how very nice of Reagan…..

Point being:
Never let a crisis go to waste….power, money, “proof of how smart I am”.

Where is Einstein when we really needed him…..

Now, is this climate change making it hot or cold? Still trying to figure this one out???????

Sunday was nice and warm, but I heard that Thursday, April 3rd, could be a snow fall of 10″???? Holy crap, the sky is falling!!!!!!!

If anyone can tell me what the temperature of the earth is supposed to be, then I will entertain a global warming argument. we are really coming out of the last ice age…yes still. We have been quite a bit warmer in the past than we are right now. CO2 is a green houses gas and will raise temperatures to a point. At a certain saturation level the temperature stops rising. We are way above the saturation point in which CO2 has any impact. way way above. If you look at CO2 vs. Temp rise it is opposite of what you hear on the news. Historically, Temperature rises first. Then CO2 rises after that. It is based on ICE Core samples taken around the globe.
Another inconvenient fact is that the earth is more productive when it is warmer. Warmer than the last 100 years. Cold climate kills. Warm produces.
But But But Mt. Kilimanjar used to have Snow on top of it!!! Yes true, But it was also surrounded by a rich forest before it was dessimated by people causing an arid environment warming the region. Honestly. What make more sense? Dont get me started on Volcanoes

Quote:

---

I’ve tried to let these completely insulting threads about science and global warming go without comment but frankly its embarrassing. do we know the climate is changing…. yes. do we know how much… no. do we know what is causing it… not entirely. but just because we don’t understand something doesn’t make it false.

---

And there’s the rub. Most Global Warming, er, climate change proponents do not present it that way. They present climate change, a misnomer and/or redundant statement to begin with, as apocalyptic, complete with over estimated hockey stick charts.

Don’t play along and you are mocked as flat earthists. They can’t even get that right. Back then the consensus was that the earth was flat and to think otherwise was fool hearty and blasphemy.

Has anyone been watching Cosmos? They say that earth has cooled and warmed many times in history. It will do both in the future/ with or without man.

I struggle with the people who like to say there is or is not global warming, climate change, or any other buzz words.

The fact of the matter is this:
We are all better off if we protect our environment. Whether this has to do with protecting out lakes from pollution, the ozone layer from CFCs, or pollution run off from golf courses. Just one example is the Mississippi. 30 years ago it was a cesspool of pollution. Now it is a awesome body of water, but we can still do more. We cannot even find a huge jet in an ocean because of all the garbage in the ocean that is throwing off searchers.

The climate has been changing as long as the earth has existed, we all agree with this. But you cannot argue this without looking at the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is at an all time high. This can come from many sources, but I think we are all better off if we try to slow or stop these levels.

I can see the “I am right and you are wrong” theory, but everyone suffers when the environment suffers. The argument of the hows, whys and ifs do not matter. Help the environment, help us all.

I am far from a tree hugger, but I love the outdoors, and want to have my children love it as well. I also firmly believe the USA needs to get other countries to buy in as well. Degradation of the rain forest, Chinas environmental policies or lack thereof, and all CO2 emissions.

We cannot force everyone to do everything, but small steps still get to the top of the mountain.

Quote:

---

I struggle with the people who like to say there is or is not global warming, climate change, or any other buzz words.

The fact of the matter is this:
We are all better off if we protect our environment. Whether this has to do with protecting out lakes from pollution, the ozone layer from CFCs, or pollution run off from golf courses. Just one example is the Mississippi. 30 years ago it was a cesspool of pollution. Now it is a awesome body of water, but we can still do more. We cannot even find a huge jet in an ocean because of all the garbage in the ocean that is throwing off searchers.

The climate has been changing as long as the earth has existed, we all agree with this. But you cannot argue this without looking at the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is at an all time high. This can come from many sources, but I think we are all better off if we try to slow or stop these levels.

I can see the “I am right and you are wrong” theory, but everyone suffers when the environment suffers. The argument of the hows, whys and ifs do not matter. Help the environment, help us all.

I am far from a tree hugger, but I love the outdoors, and want to have my children love it as well. I also firmly believe the USA needs to get other countries to buy in as well. Degradation of the rain forest, Chinas environmental policies or lack thereof, and all CO2 emissions.

We cannot force everyone to do everything, but small steps still get to the top of the mountain.

---

This.

Clean up and protect the environment for the sake of cleaning it up and protecting the delicate ecosystems that are needed to support life. Don’t promote a clean environment under the pretense of false hysteria.

Its really hard to believe so many people think the government and intellectual community would perpetuate such a falsehood for so long in the name of anything other than the truth.

Quote:

---

We all know the climate is changing, there is no disputing that, but I have a very hard time seeing humans are the key factor, since there are studies showing the temperature has been rising for at least the last 2-3 hundred years. There weren’t any cars and very few human’s compared what we have now. And 1000 years ago we had what was called the “Medieval Warm Period” which some are estimating was warmer than we have right now a few hundred years after that it was what they call a “Little Ice Age”. This is the earth we have ebbs and flows of temperature and weather, it has been happening for billions of years, why does it happen to be humans fault right now?

---

Very well put, and I totally agree.

The fact that the climate IS changing is nothing new. The people who are being shouted down in this “climate change debate” are the people in the middle.

I’m not denying that climate change is occurring. Nor that it could be a threat.

But climate change–in many cases, radical and rapid climate change–has been scientifically proved to have occurred completely independent of any man-made cause. In additional to the Medieval “warm period”, there was afterward a period when Europe experienced unprecedented cold over a 50 year period.

In the late 1600s, the River Thames in London froze all the way across at Westminster (the current Houses of Parliament)on a number of winters over a period of more than a decade. This event was unprecedented then, and it has not happened at any time since then.

So we know scientifically that rapid climate change can occur and can reverse itself without man either causing it or doing anything to reverse it.

What I’m asking is a basic question that thus far has NOT been addressed (and in some cases have been actively avoided) by the scientific community:

What part of this current rise in global temperatures can be DIRECTLY attributed ONLY to man-made causes?

This question has not been answered with empirical, peer-reviewed research in a way that would be considered scientifically valid in any area of science.

In other words, if you can answer “What part did we play in the cause?”, you have an answer for “How much can we influence the outcome?”

That’s what I want to know. Because if we can’t influence the outcome to any large extent, then the question becomes not about attempting to reverse the trend. It becomes about using resources to prepare for the inevitable.

Grouse

For those that believe in catastrophic global warming, their anger is misdirect. They are mad at global warming “deniers”. Let’s take a closer look.

They have been charged with the task of showing evidence of global warming to us lay people. We don’t have the time or desire to read 1000 page IPCC reports. So they gave us overly “optimistic” warming models in the form or charts. They also predicted catastrophic events to increase in number and intensity.

What we have been seeing the last 10 years is a trend that will put the actual temperature outside of the lower margins for those models. And they are scrambling for an explanation. Not one accounted for this mysterious “pause”.

I find it hard to trust people who are so adamant, fudged numbers and would mock opposition as much as they want to suppress it.

IMO, global warmongers shot themselves in the foot.

Why would people do this, I’m talking scientists, not us? Like I tried explaining before, some just want to run with the crowd. Some are so eager to prove they are right that they are sloppy, miss things and sometimes even flat out ignore things that contradict what they are trying to prove. Like I said it is ego. Not ego in terms of ones self importance or pride, but ego in psychological terms. As in the desire to be right, so much that subconsciously one will ignore anything to the contrary of their belief, even if factual.

Quote:

---

Its really hard to believe so many people think the government and intellectual community would perpetuate such a falsehood for so long in the name of anything other than the truth.

---

Must be easy for you to vote if you believe everything you hear from a canidate

+1 Farmboy.

Quote:

---

Like I said it is ego. Not ego in terms of ones self importance or pride, but ego in psychological terms. As in the desire to be right, so much that subconsciously one will ignore anything to the contrary of their belief, even if factual.

---

Soooo……I’m curious, which side are you referring to in the statement above?
Cause from what I’ve seen, it could be either side.

Well when I was younger (in the late 60’s) our science class was all about the coming ice age from use spray cans. I even remember the Time magazine article with the cover photos being a frozen planet. Who knew ????

Quote:

---

I struggle with the people who like to say there is or is not global warming, climate change, or any other buzz words.

The fact of the matter is this:
We are all better off if we protect our environment. Whether this has to do with protecting out lakes from pollution, the ozone layer from CFCs, or pollution run off from golf courses. Just one example is the Mississippi. 30 years ago it was a cesspool of pollution. Now it is a awesome body of water, but we can still do more. We cannot even find a huge jet in an ocean because of all the garbage in the ocean that is throwing off searchers.

The climate has been changing as long as the earth has existed, we all agree with this. But you cannot argue this without looking at the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is at an all time high. This can come from many sources, but I think we are all better off if we try to slow or stop these levels.

I can see the “I am right and you are wrong” theory, but everyone suffers when the environment suffers. The argument of the hows, whys and ifs do not matter. Help the environment, help us all.

I am far from a tree hugger, but I love the outdoors, and want to have my children love it as well. I also firmly believe the USA needs to get other countries to buy in as well. Degradation of the rain forest, Chinas environmental policies or lack thereof, and all CO2 emissions.

We cannot force everyone to do everything, but small steps still get to the top of the mountain.

---

True. I know I have conscientiously ignored things that don’t jibe with my reasoning. There ain’t no shame in admitting that.

Warming or not, two things of interest pertaining to this discussion can be presented as fact.

Our industrial society has essentially tapped a hydrocarbon reserve that was created over a time-frame that isn’t easily comprehended by folks typically concerned with getting out of bed in the morning. Exponential energy consumption is the lead driver of the global economy, providing jobs for research scientists and turd salesmen alike. You can talk about volcanoes and cow farts, but the truth is that we have disrupted the carbon cycle during the course of human existence through our consumption of energy, all within the last 100 years.

The absorption spectrum of C02 has an ordained ability to trap long wave IR radiation that bounces off the earth (from the sun). Although C02 isn’t the most effective, or most common greenhouse gas, the absorption spectrum of C02 essentially plugs the gaps that other gases such as water vapor and methane don’t readily absorb.

Quote:

---

What I’m asking is a basic question that thus far has NOT been addressed (and in some cases have been actively avoided) by the scientific community:

What part of this current rise in global temperatures can be DIRECTLY attributed ONLY to man-made causes?

This question has not been answered with empirical, peer-reviewed research in a way that would be considered scientifically valid in any area of science.

---

The premise behind your question is demonstrably false. There are literally hundreds of peer-reviewed papers on the question of detection and attribution. A summary with 13 pages of references to relevant peer-reviewed literature is found here:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_Chapter10_FINAL.pdf

Quote:

---

… And turtles. I like turtles.

---

I want to bite into this sooooooo bad, but I’ve done my fair share of argument on this topic. I just encourage everyone to do some research into our world’s history, and how the Sun and Ocean Currents primarily dictate our climate. If the climate has been going through more severe warm and cold cycles for thousands of years with no earthborn factors contributing to them in the past, why are humans all of a sudden the ones to blame…. also take a look into the funding the IPPC gets, and the billions in revenue made by global warming regulation…. and how little the average salary of the scientists who oppose… that alone should blow your mind.
I am against real pollution, but I’m allergic to BS.. if I can find the fine line, I think anyone can.

“billions in revenue made by global warming regulation”.

This is a bad thing? Is a diverse portfolio what is at best to combat energy needs?

1234 wait

Were being controled by our government and told what to believe.

There is the punchline.

When it comes out of our pocket based on falsified studies and pure BS yes…

Ultimately its the fossil fuel suckers against reason. And they will go to all extreme to discount views opposite of theirs and to protect their fuel and their income and way of life.
Nobody likes change. I get it. I say lets prosper off this and continue creating goods and services off this so called sky is falling, the fossil fuel suckers like to reiterate as a power position.

What is good should be denied by what you say by what you stated?

Ben how is that forced digital wave length doing for you from back in the 90s?
Progression is better than stagnant in my mind.

Oil companies bank off “global warming” who do you think powers the generators that run the windmills… And the man shut down several nuclear power plants, giving “fossil fuel” burning an even higher demand. You won’t find a single scientist lobbying for big oil in the climate sector because they (oil companies).
(A.) know the world will always need oil
(B.) they know the hype is all BS

I didn’t feel like reading all of the previous banter but here’s my opinion.

Forget the $$ being allocated to climate scientists. Forget the egos. Forget the naysayers.

Let’s just say a major world country imposed sudden and strict laws supporting renewable or low emission energy. Many of these are in there extreme infancy. They are not profitable resulting in a severe hit to the country’s economy.

I don’t mean a crash, I mean a sluggish economy. Oil and gas is such a profitable and important piece to major world country’s economies, that you simply couldn’t give up that economic growth in fear it would put you at a severe disadvantage.

My point is no matter how much is invested in a good crisis, your government is gong to do what is best for your short and long term economy. They’ll say one thing and do another. Seem familiar?

I’m sure most naysayers think its a political issue, not a climate issue. They’re right!

There’s a beautiful pattern in this particular topic which is why I usually avoid getting involved in these debates.
1) someone comes in with actual facts that The sheep don’t have an answer to because they haven’t done any research,
2) the sheep cut down at the individual or blame oil companies because they don’t actually have a clue what they’re debating.

I shouldn’t have bit in the first place, thanks for reminding me why I’ve been staying away from biting again for so long.

Not sure if you’re referring to me or not, but there’s no blaming of big oil. When you’ve seen your business go from less than 5% to more than 80% of your business go to big oil, there’s no doubt what is running this economy.

I’m in no position to make any determination whether or not the planet is warming. I’ve given up because I don’t know. To be honest, don’t really care any more.