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 think you mean Pew research are idiots, because that is what I posted...What does this make you? LOL....Not the sharpest tool in the shed, I would say.
Oh so you believe everything that Pew Research says............that makes you the idiot.......I would say.
Actually you have it backwards, it is the right wing nut jobs and the tea party that have made this a political issue....Science has not changed it's opinion.....It is not about control, it is about facts, facts that you do not want to accept.
So, the TEA Party existed back when the Al Gore made his docu-drama "An Inconvenient Truth?"
Oh so you believe everything that Pew Research says............that makes you the idiot.......I would say.
I'm waiting for these people to spout the line of talk that they have accounted for all the potential natural causes, or “forcings,” in our climate which be might be behind the cause for the warming we have observed since 1700, and they believe these natural forcings are not enough to explain recent temperature increases, <drum roll>..... therefore the changes must be due to human activity.
This is the inane, insipid, sophomoric logic from the AGW crowd that says, "the warming must be due to humans because... ummmm... we can’t think of anything else it could be." tada!
The same old tactics, insult and deride anyone who has a different opinion then yours.
We have been in a dramatic warming trend since 1700, which should prove to you that CO2 is not the driving force behind it. Are we helping it along by pumping CO2 into the atmosphere, of course, but CO2 is not the driving force, and it's limited.The sensitivity that our atmospheric CO2 has on the greenhouse is one of diminishing returns, its affect declines exponentially even as it rises, and at 400 ppm is now reaching an asymptote.
Q: Is there a point at which adding more CO2 will not cause further warming?
A: No. Adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will cause surface temperatures to continue to increase. As the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 increase, the addition of extra CO2 becomes progressively less effective at trapping Earth’s energy, but surface temperature will still rise.
"Figure 3. Data from ice cores have been used to reconstruct Antarctic temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations over the past 800,000 years. Temperature is based on measurements of the isotopic content of water in the Dome C ice core. CO2 is measured in air trapped in ice, and is a composite of the Dome C and Vostok ice core. The current CO2 concentration (blue star) is from atmospheric measurements. The cyclical pattern of temperature variations constitutes the ice age/ interglacial cycles. During these cycles, changes in CO2 concentrations (in blue) track closely with changes in temperature (in red). As the record shows, the recent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration is unprecedented in the past 800,000 years. Source: Figure by Jeremy Shakun, data from Lüthi et al., 2008 and Jouzel et al., 2007."
I'm waiting for these people to spout the line of talk that they have accounted for all the potential natural causes, or “forcings,” in our climate which be might be behind the cause for the warming we have observed since 1700, and they believe these natural forcings are not enough to explain recent temperature increases, <drum roll>..... therefore the changes must be due to human activity.
This is the inane, insipid, sophomoric logic from the AGW crowd that says, "the warming must be due to humans because... ummmm... we can’t think of anything else it could be." tada!
Perhaps if you read what climate scientists actually say, instead of what you have been told they say, you might have a better understanding?
"Different influences on climate have different signatures in climate records. These unique fingerprints are easier to see by probing beyond a single number (such as the average temperature of Earth’s surface), and looking instead at the geographical and seasonal patterns of climate change.
The observed patterns of surface warming, temperature changes through the atmosphere, increases in ocean heat content, increases in atmospheric moisture, sea level rise, and increased melting of land and sea ice also match the patterns scientists expect to see due to rising levels of CO2 and other human-induced changes.
The expected changes in climate are based on our understanding of how greenhouse gases trap heat. Both this fundamental understanding of the physics of greenhouse gases and fingerprint studies show that natural causes alone are inadequate to explain the recent observed changes in climate.
Natural causes include variations in the Sun’s output and in Earth’s orbit around the Sun, volcanic eruptions, and internal fluctuations in the climate system (such as El Niño and La Niña). Calculations using climatemodels (see infobox, p.20) have been used to simulate what would have happened to global temperatures if only natural factors were influencing the climate system.
These simulations yield little warming, or even a slight cooling, over the 20th century. Only when models include human influences on the composition of the atmosphere are the resulting temperature changes consistent with observed changes."
You left wingers college boys don't have the education enough to admit when you're wrong!
Evolution deniers and AGW deniers don't seem to "have the education enough" to know when they are "not even wrong".
Not even wrong: "The phrase implies that not only is someone not making a valid point in a discussion, but they don't even understand the nature of the discussion itself, or the things that need to be understood in order to participate."
All of these global warming threads are irrelevant. I don't believe that humans can have enough impact on the planet to cause long-term global changes. That being said, the Earth will change dramatically at some point. We are living in the most stable 10,000 years in the planet's history. In fact, if we were as smart as we think we are, we should be trying to find out how we can change the planet's climate in both directions, instead of proclaiming that we have already accidentally done so and then pretending to fix it was electric cars and solar street lamps. Eventually our planet is going to become inhospitable regardless of our activity here, and when that time comes we better have a plan. And we better hope it isn't any time soon because our space travel technology is pathetic and we would have no real chance in changing the planet's climate if we tried, at least not with our technology. But at least I can still get my phone to tell me where the nearest Wawa is, that's pretty cool.
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.
