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 know that when it's local the global warming people call it "weather" but I just wanted to point out that a "once in a lifetime" ice jam is threatening to flood Trenton and the coast guard is unable to keep the shipping lanes open on the Delaware due to a massive accumulation of ice:
I don't think you understand the significance of what mircea was attempting to point out, which is critical to the entire debate.
If a person or group wants to show a "trend" ... in this case, a trend of global warming, the "starting point" selected would obviously need to be lower than the end point to support the claim. Take note that 1880 was at the tail end of the "Little Ice Age".
If, on the other hand, you don't wish to defraud the world, and expose how science is nothing more than a political weapon comprised of no-account intellectual con artists, then you might use the starting point of 2000 years ago, rather than 130 years. If you do, what you will find is an overall "slight" cooling globally, with intermitent and brief warming events.
Global warming "science", if carefully analyzed may represent the greatest consolidated fraud ever perpetrated. Given the volume of competition, defines just how dramatic the absense of integrity is within mainstream scientific circles who would be more than happy to provide compelling evidence proving that the moon is made of cream cheese, so long as NASA's grant money kept flowing.
But the global warming hoaxers always start their charts and graphs during the little ice-age, because this way it show that alarmist warming trend. If they started it thousands of years ago, you'd see the entire picture, and that would ruin their claims and spoil the scam.
No I'm not. I will play stupid like you are. Oh there haven't been any nuclear tests right? Is that what your saying? Have you even paid attention since WWII?? I guess not. You go on playing dumb. That is what most global warmers do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25
Thank you for that link. Actually more interesting than I thought. The nukes are helping us out it appears. Makes sense though when you think about it.
LOLZ. So man made nuclear bomb detonations momentarily decreased temperatures and you still can't admit we have an influence on climate.
Not to mention you said you didn't have to post a link, then turned around and decided to care when someone did......
LOLZ. So man made nuclear bomb detonations momentarily decreased temperatures and you still can't admit we have an influence on climate.
Not to mention you said you didn't have to post a link, then turned around and decided to care when someone did......
Show me where any of this is in the puter modeling hero? It's as if it never happened to the global warming community. I've said many a time (which folks like you ignore) if you want to blame man then go look at the nukes. You never do and never will and will never put it into your models. EVER. Just pathetic. You can take your global warming nonsense and stick it where the sun don't shine...........lol
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.
