U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 10-26-2011, 11:38 AM
 
27,065 posts, read 19,106,188 times
Reputation: 3677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Here is their smoking gun:

Most climate scientists attribute warming since the mid-1950, at least to some degree, to carbon dioxide emissions from human activities – burning coal, oil, and to a lesser extent gas, and from land-use changes.


At least to some degree? So no real proof. What warmed us up out of the little ice-age, and when are supposed to be done warming out of it? What is the normal temp for our planet?
Yeah, to some degree...

Quote:
The Sun is a relatively low mass star and as such its death will be relatively mundane (at least by Astronomical standards). The Sun's luminosity and radius have been increasing since it started life and will continue to gradually increase in this manner for another 4.5 billion years or so. When the hydrogen in the core is all used up energy generation will stop there, however it will continue in a thin shell around the core. It is this which makes the Sun expand since it heats up the outer layers more. Funnilly enough this makes the very outer layer cooler so that sun will actually redden as well as becoming brighter and expanding. I suspect that this reddening might be the first signs the the Sun has left the Main Sequence.
Curious About Astronomy: What will happen to life on Earth when the Sun becomes a red giant?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-26-2011, 11:42 AM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,441 posts, read 8,478,630 times
Reputation: 6661
Rush Limbaugh, the ultimate authority on everything, has not yet announced that global warming is real. Therefore, it is not real.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2011, 11:46 AM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
24,030 posts, read 16,677,903 times
Reputation: 9632
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
uhm
the oceans are not really rising

while some areas show a rise..most other markers show a decline

and the average is less than +/- 3cm in the last 150 years.....basicley no change, to a slight decline

the sealevel is nearly the same as it was in 1842
...infact it is BELOW the sealevel mark made in 1842

http://www.city-data.com/forum/20906885-post28.html

In 1842 the "Isle of the Dead" in SE Tasmania was selected for the site of a "Mean Sea Level" refernce mark by Capt. James Clark Ross. Today this mark can clearly be seen 35 cm ABOVE the current mean sea level.





you cant deny it
Global sea levels are indeed rising, and I have no idea why you want to deny what has been recorded. CU Sea Level Research Group | University of Colorado

Sea Level Rise -- National Geographic
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2011, 11:51 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
32,923 posts, read 26,445,938 times
Reputation: 14904
No I understand. The Great Guru has not approved. No wonder the RWA's are fighting against the obvious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2011, 11:51 AM
 
27,065 posts, read 19,106,188 times
Reputation: 3677
I have no idea why global warming folks aren't moving to the mountains and higher elevations in droves...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2011, 12:52 PM
 
7,862 posts, read 2,306,081 times
Reputation: 3035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Here is their smoking gun:

Most climate scientists attribute warming since the mid-1950, at least to some degree, to carbon dioxide emissions from human activities burning coal, oil, and to a lesser extent gas, and from land-use changes.


At least to some degree? So no real proof. What warmed us up out of the little ice-age, and when are supposed to be done warming out of it? What is the normal temp for our planet?
Let me take this a step further ..... as I've previously said, Climate is not measured in decades, so the first clue that you're dealing with fabricated nonsense comes from ... "Since the 1950's .... balh, blah, blah ..."

The very elementary fact of making any comparison, whether it is "Global Warming" or the production of Jelly Beans is totally dictated by the two points of reference one chooses to use for that comparison.

For example, (these are hypothetical numbers that I'm making up for the purpose of illustrating the point) .... let's say we want to show a rise in average temperature to prove global warming .... so we select December, 1950 average temp of 48 degrees (because it was unusually cold that winter) .... and then compare it to December of 1989's average of 57 degrees (because it was unusually warm that winter) ... showing a 9 degree differential. But if we had selected 1949 as the starting point when the average was a normal 53 degrees, and selected an end point of 1996 when it was an unusually cold 49 degrees, it would show a DECLINE in temperature average of 4 degrees. Do you see how this works?

The reality is, the old saying is true .... figures lie, and liars figure. Climate must be measured over very long stretches of time, because there are natural variations in warming and cooling trends, and depending on which points in that record you select, you can show whatever you want to show ... warming or cooling.

It really amazes me that people fall for this "slight of hand" trickery. It's childlike nonsense ... making shadow figures on the wall with your hand ... very entertaining for young children, but we adults should require more sophisticated entertainment ... like "Family Guy" and "The Simpson's"

As for global warming crooks.... (and those promoting the science are pure frauds and indeed criminals really, because they are engaged in a conspiracy to defraud people) here's another example of how deviously dishonest they really are .... and this again comes from the "Skeptical Science" debunkers I referenced in one of my previous posts ....

The topic is how today's global temperature compares with the Medieval Warm Period (circa 800-1200). Here's what they say:

(source - How does the Medieval Warm Period compare to current global temperatures? )

excerpt:

Firstly, evidence suggests that the Medieval Warm Period was in fact warmer than today in many parts of the globe such as in the North Atlantic. This warming thereby allowed Vikings to travel further north than had been previously possible because of reductions in sea ice and land ice in the Arctic. However, evidence also suggests that some places were very much cooler than today including the tropical pacific. All in all, when the warm places are averaged out with the cool places, it becomes clear that the overall warmth was likely similar to early to mid 20th century warming. Since that early century warming, temperatures have risen well-beyond those achieved during the Medieval Warm Period across most of the Globe.


and

Secondly, the Medieval Warm Period has known causes which explain both the scale of the warmth and the pattern. It has now become clear to scientists that the Medieval Warm Period occurred during a time which had higher than average solar radiation and less volcanic activity (both resulting in warming). New evidence is also suggesting that changes in ocean circulation patterns played a very important role in bringing warmer seawater into the North Atlantic. This explains much of the extraordinary warmth in that region. These causes of warming contrast significantly with today's warming, which we know cannot be caused by the same mechanisms.

Now let's analyze this load of steaming manure that many might mistake as statements of actual facts, when nothing could be further from the truth .....

Let's take the last statement first .... " .... which we know cannot be caused by the same mechanisms". Really ... we "know" this? We know that the current warming cannot be caused by the Sun? How do we know this? (They don't say ... they just make the claim and expect you to believe it) This is just one example of passing off a fallacy as a fact. The Sun is the primary driver of Temperature on planet earth, and anyone with a freaking brain can prove this by simply going outside and observing what happens when the Sun goes down at night ... it gets cooler

Then, we have these LIARS admit the Medieval Warm period existed and acknowledged by these schemers, but then dismissed just as quickly with the claim that "other parts were also cooler" nonsense, and when all averaged out ... no big thing, followed by the false claim that today's warming is now greater than that of this Medieval Warm Period, which is a flat out lie. The facts are, agriculture was present during the Medieval Warm Period in the Northern portions of the hemisphere where the climate today doesn't allow agriculture. This is a marker of true climate change, as opposed to median weather and temperature variation. This is a point I repeatedly stress to people who believe this bunk about "Climate Change". I ask them ... where has the climate changed? Are there palm trees growing in northern Canada? Has the citrus industry disappeared from southern California, or the Wine region left Nappa Valley? Hell no ... the major climate regions remain exactly the same today as the day I was born in the 1950's ... with variation in temperature both up AND down occurring in trends during the past 50 years simply that ... natural temperature variation trends, and nothing remotely close to actual "Climate Change". The freaking climate has not changed .... your grandpa could get a suntan on the same beach you can get one now ... and he could drink a glass of wine produced in the same region that wine is still produced today, and a glass of orange juice produced in the same place today .... etc., etc.


Furthermore, there are two important points within the issue of the Medieval Warm Period that are not discussed ...

1) that this warming period affected the Arctic region in far greater magnitude than is now currently seen, yet we are supposed to be in full crisis mode today because of the Arctic Ice melting and Polar bears allegedly drowning, and the planet in grave peril, even though the planet didn't explode into flames when crops were being grown in Iceland, and Vineyards were prevalent in the northern regions of England way back when. Talk about inane reasoning ... this is astounding.

2) that warming periods do indeed represent a POSITIVE rather than a negative outcome ... as agriculture represents prosperity and abundance, while the lack of it represents starvation and death ... DUH !

Then, we have the false fact claims .... "Scientists now understand" or "Scientists now agree" ploys ... when the reality is, only AGW scientists agree with AGW ... the other scientists, and there are Hundreds, if not Thousands of them that DON'T AGREE, but their voices aren't heard ... they are blocked from publication ... blocked from participating in the meetings and debates and conferences ... only those in agreement with consensus AGW conclusions are allowed to the party. This is CLEARLY scientific fraud with blatantly egregious censorship.

These scammers claim that the Medieval Warm period was caused by completely different mechanisms than modern warming ... back then it was caused by solar activity and lack of volcanic activity, and changes in ocean currents .... but they also deny any of these mechanisms could explain modern warming trends seen ... even though these same warming trends have been observed on other freaking planets in our own solar system, which ought to be a BIG CLUE that maybe man's activities aren't responsible for Mars or Venus warming up!!!

This is a great representation of the slight of hand trickery ... the logical fallacy ... the assumed facts .... and the outright distortions and lies that personify the Global Warming fraud.

And the gullibility of the public seems to know no boundary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2011, 12:54 PM
 
7,862 posts, read 2,306,081 times
Reputation: 3035
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Global sea levels are indeed rising, and I have no idea why you want to deny what has been recorded. CU Sea Level Research Group | University of Colorado

Sea Level Rise -- National Geographic

No they aren't.

Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told' - Telegraph
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2011, 01:10 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,356 posts, read 3,131,873 times
Reputation: 1684
How warm should the earth be?


My understanding is that throughout most of the earth's history the average temperature was around 10C warmer then it is today.


Perhaps it is not now quite warm enough, and we should hope for more global warming in the future.


Edit: Yikes, I've found there is such a thing called the climate optimum, which is a few degree warmer then it is today! If the name means anything, let's all hope this earth doesn't stop warming for at least a few more decades yet!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2011, 01:11 PM
 
7,862 posts, read 2,306,081 times
Reputation: 3035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
Rush Limbaugh, the ultimate authority on everything, has not yet announced that global warming is real. Therefore, it is not real.
And Michael Mann has a Hockey Stick which indeed turned out to be pure hockey!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2011, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
24,030 posts, read 16,677,903 times
Reputation: 9632
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
That is an opinion...The recorded sea levels say the opposite..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top