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.
There may be an inverse relationship between Americans' belief in man-made global warming and the mean global temperature, but there is a direct relationship between the belief in man-mind global warming and the intelligence of the average American. The United States of Stupid -- it has a nice ring to it.
Half the people on this thread don't understand your reply.
There was nothing falsified about the data; the number of "scientists" who don't agree with global warming is minuscule compared to those who do believe in the theory. The "holdouts" are mainly quacks who don't even have background in climatology, and they get paid by corporations to lie in "academic" journals.
Moreover, the theory of global warming is one that has been almost irrefutably proven true over the course of the past 100 years. A rise in global temperatures was predicted in the 1890s, and it happened; predicted again in the 1930s, and it happened; and predicted again in the 1970s, and it happened yet again. In fact, the science behind global warming is more convincing than the science behind the Big Bang. Stop deluding yourself and study the facts. When there's more carbon in the air, the temperature rises. It's that simple. Debate done.
Science always works better when unencumbered by political considerations.
NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.
"The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show," Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. "There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans."
In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.
The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.
Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA and NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not increasing in the manner predicted by alarmist computer models. The Terra satellite data also support data collected by NASA's ERBS satellite showing far more longwave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and 1999 than alarmist computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted..................
Half the people on this thread don't understand your reply.
Oh, I understood it completely. There is a reason the global warmage movement is now considered a secular religion by many.
Quote:
Global Warming as Religion
You Had to See It ComingBy Chuck Colson | Christian Post Guest Columnist
Religious freedom is one of the most difficult and vexing issues of our day-whether the subject is Muslim schoolgirls in France or Christian photographers in New Mexico
And that’s before government starts calling just about any sincerely held belief a “religion.â€
That is essentially what has happened in Britain. In July 2008, Tim Nicholson was let go from his job at a property management firm. According to Nicholson, his dismissal was due to his beliefs about man-made global warming.
Nicholson calls man-made global warming “the most important issue of our time†and believes that “nothing should stand in the way of diverting this catastrophe.†This led to “frequent clashes†with his co-workers over his concerns.
For instance, Nicholson, out of concern about excess CO2 emissions, refuses to fly. He objected when the firm’s CEO flew someone from London to Ireland to retrieve his Blackberry.
When he was dismissed, Nicholson sued under Britain’s Employment Equality act, specifically the part that prohibits discrimination on account of “religion and belief.â€
According to Nicholson, “Belief in man-made climate change is...a philosophical belief that reflects my moral and ethical values.â€
For its part, his former employer countered that “green views were political and based on science, as opposed to religious or philosophical in nature.â€
In what’s being called a “landmark ruling,†a British judge ruled for Nicholson, saying that “a belief in man-made climate change...is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose†of laws covering discrimination in employment.
The judge’s ruling opens the door to the possibility of employees suing their employers “for failing to account for their green lifestyles, such as providing recycling facilities or offering low-carbon travel.â€
Theoretically, an employer could say “I need you in Helsinki by tomorrow,†to which the employee could reply, “Too much carbon, we’ll have to aim for next week, since I’ll be going by bicycle, train, and boat.â€.............
Last edited by Dutchman01; 07-29-2011 at 11:38 PM..
There was nothing falsified about the data; the number of "scientists" who don't agree with global warming is minuscule compared to those who do believe in the theory. The "holdouts" are mainly quacks who don't even have background in climatology, and they get paid by corporations to lie in "academic" journals.
Completely false. Are you calling Dr. William M. Gray a quack? A man called "World's Most Famous Hurricane expert" who after studying this for so many years, calls global warming a bad joke. Maybe you know better than a Canadian Biologist by the name of Dr. Mitchell Taylor who is an expert on Polar Bears. According to this renowned biologist, Polar Bear populations are growing in 11 of the 13 populations in Canada.
Or maybe the founder of the Weather Channel John Coleman and the 33,000-9,000 of which had PhDs- scientists who agreed with him that man made global warming is rubbish. How about one of Germany's top scientist Reinhard Huttl who is a soil scientist and former member of Advisory Council on the Environment states that global warming is a lie that has gone on to long. He is disgusted at how blindly people follow this rubbish. According to you, these top scientists and thousands of others are just "quacks."
Have you taken any classes on global warming at a University? I had to take a boat load of this nonsense at a world renowned university for Oceanography and study data as part of my major, before I switched to Engineering.
It seems the real quacks are those who are in the margin believing man-made global warming is happening.
I like how the article disparages "alarmist" global warming models. Sounds nice and objective to me.....
The numbers in the poll upthread are a pretty good thermometer on the political temperature of this group..hot air is very well represented.
It's the findings of nasa and the noaa that count. I'm guessing you can't "see" that part of he article. It's ok, I understand. You're entitled to your "beliefs."
Last edited by CaseyB; 07-30-2011 at 05:42 AM..
Reason: copyright
Mate, the results are in. The temperatures have warmed on average by more than 1 degree C, and they're rising. This phenomenon was predicted as long ago as 1896. Keep up.
Completely false. Are you calling Dr. William M. Gray a quack?
Yes, you're damn right I'm calling him a quack -- a quack who believes that because he can get a weather prediction right maybe 50 percent of the time that he's qualified to offer counter opinions about global warming that most climatologists with a shred of credibility scoff at. Not to mention the fact that, at the end of the day, bud, the data about global warming support those who believe in global warming, not some weather quack.
Quote:
According to this renowned biologist, Polar Bear populations are growing in 11 of the 13 populations in Canada.
I'm thinking you wouldn't know a non sequitur if it gave you a reach-around.
Quote:
Or maybe the founder of the Weather Channel John Coleman and the 33,000-9,000 of which had PhDs- scientists who agreed with him that man made global warming is rubbish. How about one of Germany's top scientist Reinhard Huttl who is a soil scientist and former member of Advisory Council on the Environment states that global warming is a lie that has gone on to long. He is disgusted at how blindly people follow this rubbish. According to you, these top scientists and thousands of others are just "quacks."
What next, a group of geologists (on the Exxon payroll) who disagree with global warming as well? Would climatologists be taken seriously by the Weather Channel if they started making weather forecasts?
Quote:
Have you taken any classes on global warming at a University? I had to take a boat load of this nonsense at a world renowned university for Oceanography and study data as part of my major, before I switched to Engineering.
It seems the real quacks are those who are in the margin believing man-made global warming is happening.
Except that it actually *is* happening and there's no evidence you have to the contrary. Deal with it, brother.
There was nothing falsified about the data; the number of "scientists" who don't agree with global warming is minuscule compared to those who do believe in the theory. The "holdouts" are mainly quacks who don't even have background in climatology, and they get paid by corporations to lie in "academic" journals.
Moreover, the theory of global warming is one that has been almost irrefutably proven true over the course of the past 100 years. A rise in global temperatures was predicted in the 1890s, and it happened; predicted again in the 1930s, and it happened; and predicted again in the 1970s, and it happened yet again. In fact, the science behind global warming is more convincing than the science behind the Big Bang. Stop deluding yourself and study the facts. When there's more carbon in the air, the temperature rises. It's that simple. Debate done.
Soooo, that is why 2600 Scientist have sued the UN FOR USING THEIR NAMES AS PART OF THE 2680 who supposed to support the lie and fraud of global warming? BTW, Why is it that al gore's wife filed for divorce and 1 of her reasons given is she will no longer live the global warming lie presented by her estranged husband? hmmmm, and I'd think she is in a pretty good position to know!
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.
