Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe there are very few folks denying global warming.
Many, like myself, believe these cycles of warming and cooling occur naturally and have over the history of time.
Al Gore says you got to exagerate to scare the people into believing man made global warming.
I rated you positive for your civil, unhysterical tone. I like that in a denier!
Your second statement is correct as far as it goes. We do have natural cycles of warming and cooling. Apparently climate scientists are very aware of those, and are telling us that the warming we are experiencing does not correlate to any known cycle. Now I realize that it's possible that we are in a previously UNknown cycle, one that would require a wavelength of greater than 400K years. But combine our situation with the fact that we ARE rapidly increasing CO2, and increased CO2 does correlate with temperature (this has been both theorized and observed), and that this warming was predicted over a century ago...and the case for AGW grows appreciably stronger.
As to Al Gore...just remember, if he had never existed, the earth would still be warming.
Global warming is happening as it has been happening on and off for the life of the planet,the real question of contention is mans presence on Earth causing an abnormal rise in this cycle of global warming?.
The scientists are quite certain that it is. They show us easy-to-do experiments to confirm it. I'm not sure why you would question it, unless you yourself have conducted experiments or written peer-reviewed articles to show otherwise? I'm not denigrating your level of education, but it's usually the case that we accept the scientific consensus on other issues, why are so many laypeople weighing in on this one?
First of all, can someone tell me what "Multi-Quote This Message" does?
Second, can you be specific as to what "facts" have overcome the, uh, "hysterical feelings" of 98% of climate scientists?
Third, can you be specific as to what "lies" the scientists have "sprouted"? (Oh, dear, I hope you're not referring to ClimateGate? That's been so thoroughly put to rest it's not funny!)
As to that video...I'm 2:00 into it and already discovered two errors, one factual, one conceptual. Should I elucidate? Well, why not...
The factual error is that man's contribution to CO2 emissions is just a tad over 3%, not 7%.* Which would seem to inveigh against my own argument except that...
The conceptual error is that the CO2 we put out is just a small part of the natural carbon cycle. It is not. It is SEQUESTERED CO2 (trapped in deposits that haven't seen the light of day for hundreds of millions of years). As such, it does not get fully reabsorbed into plant life. It stays in the atmosphere for centuries. And it accumulates. That's 3% per year - now multiply that by a hundred years. Think of a bathtub that holds 100 gallons. Now, fill it with 103 gallons. Pull the drain plug. How much drains out? And how much winds up on your floor? Now do that 100 times. THAT'S the situation.
Water vapor? Yes, much stronger than CO2 at heat absorption. But this is part of the NATURAL equation for the planet, and is what sets our temperature in the range that we find livable. It is the ADDITION of CO2 that upsets the balance. Plus, water vapor does not DRIVE the temperature, quite the opposite. CO2, on the other hand, DOES drive the temperature. It is the control knob.
Methane: Yes, it's concentration is small. Currently. That will change with the release of the methane trapped in the permafrost, and possibly even the hydrites in the ocean. And methane is 20x more effective than CO2 in trapping greenhouse gases.
OK, I reached 3:13, that's enough for today, or my head will explode from watching cartoon teddy bears with electronic voices discuss physics.
*I may be wrong about this, it may be that man's contribution is 3% after absorption. It's been a while.
Well, for starters, there's this:
...I would consider us an "abnormality", given our relatively short residency on this planet.
But then there's this:
Which leads us to this...
Oh, you said, "proof". Sorry, can't provide that. No scientist can or ever will. We rely on a "preponderance of the evidence." To wait around for absolute proof would be foolish, I'm sure you agree.
Thats the question, is it an abnormal rise in Temperature caused by mans use of 100 million barrels of fossil fuel per day or is it just a natural cycle of Earths rise and fall in temperatures, no one knows the answer yet so i'm not about to give you hard evidence one way or the other.
I think what is happening is that the Al Gore style Religion of Global Warming is dying down. Facts cannot sustain the hype, especially when those facts are not present.
My personal conviction is simple: Regardless of what idiots like Al Gore say, I'm going to do my absolute best to take care of the environment. That means LIVING it, not just talking about it. Without a doubt, it is NOT going to hurt the environment to NOT hurt it.
Good for you. But what about idiots like the Pentagon? Munich Re? And the Big Five energy companies? (Oh, you didn't hear? They're actually preparing for climate change! That's right, while on the one hand funding stink tanks like Heartland Institute, they're also spending big bux on things like shoring up the Trans-Alaska pipeline, which has been weakened by permafrost thaw due to *gasp* climate change! What IDIOTS!)
Once again: blaming Al Gore for Climate Change is like blaming Candy Lightner for drunk drivers.
Good for you. But what about idiots like the Pentagon? Munich Re? And the Big Five energy companies? (Oh, you didn't hear? They're actually preparing for climate change! That's right, while on the one hand funding stink tanks like Heartland Institute, they're also spending big bux on things like shoring up the Trans-Alaska pipeline, which has been weakened by permafrost thaw due to *gasp* climate change! What IDIOTS!)
Once again: blaming Al Gore for Climate Change is like blaming Candy Lightner for drunk drivers.
Did I blame Al Gore for Climate Change? DID YOU EVEN READ WHAT I WROTE?
It is, however, pretty much undeniable that AL Gore is an utter hypocrite, who has made MILLIONS OF DOLLARS from the religion of global warming. But he does NOT practice what he preaches - which means that, deep in his heart, he does NOT believe it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
