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.
Here ya go. Have another cup of warm paranoia. There's gotta be a tax in there somewhere, even though it's never been mentioned.
You guys are funny that way. Good luck on the hoax thing… your grandkids will need all the luck they can get if you're wrong.
I have to tell the left to get a clue.. there has been climate change for millions of years.. nothing new..
In the end times the bible says we will have more occurrences of natural climate changes..we have had many natural disasters for many many years , the left thinks they are telling us something while Al Gore gets rich on something that is naturally going to occur.
The left has a brain disorder when they think they can control climate change. It is a scam.
Well why didn't you say that earlier!? When you have that kind of evidence there's no doubt in my mind that agw is a hoax.
Science is not about blind acceptance nor blind denial. Science is by its nature a process of skepticism, questioning, and testing. It is religion that demands '[i]t is up to you to accept it."
I am entirely agnostic on global warming, not being a physicist, I just don't have an opinion one way or the other. I would like to see more empirical evidence and less reliance on computer models which even global warming proponents (there's your 'global warmer') now acknowledge have failed. But I'm just a lowly blue collar union worker, so what do I know? I do know that the last time someone demanded that I "accept it or blindly deny it" was in a religious meeting. I chose to blindly deny.
Do you accept antibiotics?
I don't understand why you feel like it's important to get a climatology degree to accept the conclusions of climatologists, but you don't need to get a medical degree to accept antibiotics (assuming you do).
i dont care about a mere two thousand years ago, i am talking more like 150,000 years ago, you know during the last interglacial period. the medieval warming period was during THIS interglacial period.
Those temperatures were caused by the Earth being closer to the sun.
These temperatures are caused by humans warming the planet.
Two different causes for the same effect.
Regardless, the consequences for human civilization under that amount of warming are unknown, and talking about it simply because it was warm doesn't make much sense.
The Pilocene era is a better comparison to our current era:
Quote:
The Pliocene
After some more glacial-interglacial cycles during the Pleistocene (the last 2.6 million years), we find another period which was warmer than today: the Pliocene (between 5.3 million years and 2.6 million years). The CO2 concentration was also relatively high (Tripati, 2009). It is a very interesting period because it shows a general cooling associated to a decline of atmospheric CO2 and corresponds to the transition towards greater glaciations in the Northern Hemisphere (the increase of δ18O in figure 1 is due to the Northern ice sheets becoming bigger and the climate getting colder). That makes it a good period to study to better understand the links between CO2, climate and the ice sheets. It is unclear, however, as to why CO2 declined in this way.
Last edited by Spatula City; 11-20-2014 at 05:53 AM..
You missed this "You have ones that want all this money for all these things, even a few billion for foreign countries, where is this extra money going to come from?"
The wealthy countries should pay a majority of the cost.
You still haven't answered my question, since you don't like NOAA where do you go for your information, the research universities, National Geographic, Scientific American what is you source?
Who should we believe in matters of global warming, A. or B. ??
A.) NASA, the EPA, the UN, and America's most respected science oriented magazines.
B.) Fox news, Rush radio, and the Wall Street backed Forbes magazine..
First of all the poll is not from the media, and secondly, those numbers are just from the USA, the main hub of conspiracy theories and climate denial.
I did NOT say that the poll DID come from the media.
let's look at some MORE of the date NOT just what the poster WANTED to post.
"Overall, a large majority of the American public were personally convinced that global warming is happening (71%). Surprisingly, however, only 48 percent believed that there is consensus among the scientific community, while 40 percent of Americans believed there is a lot of disagreement among scientists over whether global warming is occurring. Thus, many Americans appeared to have already made up their minds, without waiting for a perceived scientific consensus. - See more at: American Opinions on Global Warming: A Yale/Gallup/Clearvision Poll | Yale Project on Climate Change Communication
Of course its a hoax. There is plenty of evidence for it being a hoax. I include a link to site showing that the Arctic ice sheet is now larger than its been in several years. This is in direct opposition to several AGW advocates that warned that the Arctic ice sheet would soon disappear in the summer.
But people, just think of your own experience. From the weather I've experienced in the last 20 years or so, its plainly obvious that the winters have gradually gotten cooler, as well as the summers. The same is true in Wis. They had some very mild winters 20-10 years ago. But now their weather has returned to the harsh winters that they used to have when I was a kid growing up there.
Think about the number of hurricanes we've had lately in the USA. We have had very few the last few years. That's an indication of a cooler climate, cooler ocean water temps. So I beg you, turn off the TV. You're being lied to all day long from that stupid box.
Yet every time there is some major snow storm, hurricane, tornado, wild fire, the left wingers are screaming SEE! that is global warming/climate change!
Speaking of lack of intelligence, and lack of honesty, that is a democrat to a tee...When a right winger doesn't agree with the left, they become very intolerant and start throwing out garbage like denialists, or denier, or some other insult.
It is time for people that believe in this non sense to be objective, they can't even predict the weather one month from now, you expect us to believe crazy cry wolf scenarios!?
I ask what good would it be for everyone to go around worrying about everything?
Again The weather CAN'T be changed by humans!!!!! What is it that you understand about that!?
I am posting this yet again, where is the billions of dollars of money going to come from to fund ( lets not forget the billions of dollars that will be going foreign countries ) all these things the democrats want to do? It has yet to be answered.
That would be wrong, humans have been changing the weather as well. I remember where I grew up decades ago they would try and prevent hailstorms. The Russians are also known to experiment on manipulating the weather. Weather is just complex physics. So naturally one can manipulate it by changing parameters.
You posted some valid graphs (the AGW liars one doesn't count)... the problem seems to be that you don't realize that none of them prove that AGW isn't real and AGW itself doesn't involve denying that natural cycles occur.
I have never personally denied that we're in an interglacial period, that glaciation doesn't exist, or whatever BS strawmen you're trying to assign to AGW proponents. I don't even think that qualifies as denialism-- just confusion on your part.
'Minuscule' temperature changes are relevant when you're dealing with 10,000 years of a relatively stable climate that has suddenly changed to relatively rapid warming. I mean, come on. Obviously in the scope of Earth's history this is a mere blip but considering human civilization seems to depend on a stable climate, I think it's pretty important.
There is no 'should' involved... AGW is simply a theory that explains the rapid warming we are seeing now, of which CO2 seems to be the cause. I feel like I've said this 600 times now.
You, like many others on this forum, seem to think that warming must be natural simply because the planet has been warmer in the past, as if everything on Earth is a cycle that repeats itself perfectly every single time. So if everything on Earth is a cycle, then do you think the dinosaurs are due to arrive pretty soon as well?
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.
