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 sure would like to know how you can make such a statement, and still value the truth....NASA scientists say 2012 was the ninth warmest of any year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. With the exception of 1998, the nine warmest years in the 132-year record all have occurred since 2000, with 2010 and 2005 ranking as the hottest years on record.
NASA huh? is that the NASA of Never-A-Straight-Answer fame?
OK ... so you have a short memory. You forgot all about "Climate Gate" and the cover up by the "Scientists" at the IPCC and CRU who admitted in their internal emails that during the past decade as they claimed global warming was threatening the planet, the data showed that there was an actual cooling over that period. Heck, that's over a couple a years ago, so I guess they figure that they can just renew the old fraud, knowing that the drooling unwashed masses will BUY IT ALL OVER AGAIN.
Snippet: The NOAA OIv2 weekly SST [sea surface temperature] data shows a generally declining trend over the past 20+ years since the start of the database on January 3, 1990. Sea surface temperatures are not subject to the corrupting influences of the urban heat island bias in land temperature data, which can account for up to 44% of recorded warming. Plots and data from the NOAA OIv2 weekly database from 1/3/1990 up to the last week are available.
Try reading multiple sources, and quit promoting this debunked foolishness about CO2 and Global Warming.
The big clue some of you seem to have missed is the change in terminology from Global Warming to "Climate Change" which occurred about the same time that the Climate Terrorists discovered that mother earth was not cooperating with their global warming models, and that cooling was actually occurring.
You had obviously never heard of peer review. I explained it for you. You're welcome.
I called Anthony Watts site a blog because it is a blog. He sells t-shirts for money. He gets referral bonuses from you clicking on certain links. Same business model as a web comic like The Oatmeal.
I've debated the concepts presented over and over. Its getting boring. Especially when theres users that just write exactly the same thing over and over again or just copy their arguments from someone else. Its like arguing with robots instead of people. Angry, irrational robots.
Not only had I heard of peer review... I am very familiar with it. What many of these AGW promoting scientists have done with the peer review process is disingenuous at best and dishonest if not completely fraudulent at worst. Evidence is given numerous times in their own email communications.
It's all good though because those "bloggers" Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, along with all their uneducated friends with Master's and PhD degrees in hard sciences will keep us informed of the repeated SCAMS in these published "peer reviewed" papers.
science shows that humans use oxygen and expele (exhale) co2
science shows that greenery (plantlife) uses co2 and expeles o2
science shows that co2 levels have been 3 times HIGHER than they are today, in the past (ie the co2 325(some say as high as 350) of today is is much lower than the 750-10000 that co2 levels were 100,000 years ago
science shows us that the earth has warmed AND cooled many times
science shows us that ANTARTICA was once a lush furtile land, not covered in ice
science shows us that greenland was once a green lush furtile land, not covered with ice
science shows us that GLACIERS created many of the geographical features that we look at today (ie Long Island was made by the lower reaching of graciers, the great lakes were created by glaciers, the grand canyon was created by glacial melting)
science shows us that plants would grow much better, and use less water if the co2 was HIGHER...around 700-1500ppm compared to the current 320ppm
The typical outdoor air we breathe contains 0.03 - 0.045% (300 - 450 ppm) CO2. Research (SCIENCE) demonstrates that optimum growth and production for most plants occur between 1200 - 1500 ppm CO2. These optimum CO2 levels can boost plant metabolism, growth and yield by 25 - 60%.Plants under effective CO2 enrichment and management display thicker, lush green leaves, an abundance of fragrant fruit and flowers, and stronger, more vigorous roots. CO2 enriched plants grow rapidly and must also be supplied with the other five "essential elements" to ensure proper development and a plentiful harvest.
science shows As CO2 is a critical component of growth, plants in environments with inadequate CO2 levels - below 225 ppm - will cease to grow or produce.
SCIENCE shows that plants exposed to elevated CO2 concentrations are likely to lose less water via transpiration
common sense states that as the earths polulation expands, so does the need for more plantlife...to keep our oxygen levels up.............yet the global warming liberals only want to talk about car/industry exaust; man created co2,.... and how to tax it
why do liberals DENY science???...because with the science they cant get their TAX..so they manipulate the science
We have been living in an ice-age for the last 2.588 million years. The present period is known as the Holocene Interglacial Period, which began about 11,400 years ago. Before that, world-wide temperatures were 6°F lower than today. In other words, we had a planetary mean temperature of 52°F 11,400 years ago. Today, we have a planetary mean temperature of 58°F.
The CO2 levels today are as low as they are because we are in an ice-age. 2.588 million years ago the CO2 levels were much higher. Also, as I point out earlier, it is not the CO2 that is causing an increase in temperature. It is the water vapor causing an increase in temperature, and that increase is causing more CO2 to be released into the atmosphere.
This information should not be considered an "other controversy", but it is because so many people do not believe in basic science.
What many climate researchers have long sought is a plan to keep levels of carbon dioxide at 350 ppm in the atmosphere, but we've reached a level not seen in millions of years, and it will continue to rise. Instead of working on solutions, we pretend the problem does not exist because of the enormous wealth and influence of the fossil fuel industry. It has corrupted both halls of Congress, while pumping out as much disinformation in the media as it does carbon dioxide.
As the article points out, there was no ice-age 2.588 million years ago. Both poles were free of ice, and there was no ice on Greenland, and the mean surface temperature of the planet was about 6°F warmer that it is today.
An increasing CO2 level in the atmosphere is not harmful to humans (at least not until you reach around 30,000+ ppm), does not result in increasing temperatures, and actually benefits the plant life.
OK ... we know that CO2 levels are rising, and we know that industialization, a genie which is not going to be put back into the bottle, is likely the cause. But what do we do about it, in a sensible manner, using proven technology, which does not immediately advance a whole new layer of bureaucracy (which is not subject to, and often hostile toward an open economy) as the centerpiece, whith the usual one-world mouthing about "international cooperation" which is just a buzz-phrase for putting more power in the grabby hands of Big Brother and Big Sister?
The point remains that the serious issue of climate change invariably gets hijacked into a one-sided crusade over "global warming", in an immediate play for the blind loyalty of the short-sighted and the emotional. When the zealots award all measaure of their honors to children's books set in an over-Socialized culture where "long-term" thinking is viewed as little as ten years, those of us who have to think in longer time frames, toward a future which we know won't include us, have to take it with a large grain of salt.
The tweenyboppers, and the overgrown tweenyboppers who seek to lead us all around by the nose, have to realize that their attempts to skew, and occasionally distort some of the facts outright, have damaged their reputration more than they will admit. When the handful of serious professionals on that side of the argument will agree to separate themselves from the Leftist mainstream and put Al Gore and Co. on a shorter leash, there will be room for intelligent discussion, but not before.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 05-12-2013 at 10:08 AM..
I didn't realize NOAA existed 3 million years ago.
Humans with mental capacity didn't even exist 3 million years ago but yet we're supposed to believe some 50 year old nerd with a political agenda?
Give me a ****ing break.
Pssst!
It's this crazy thing called science. I know Rush and Glenn tell you its all about politics, and wealth distribution, but here is a fact for you: Both of them know know as little, or perhaps less, about science than you do.
Science is your friend. Don't be scared of 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.
