Here's data from the NASA web site debunking your point. NASA is a nonpartisan organization. Right wing propaganda is so easy to disprove. It's like taking candy from a baby.
NASA warming scientist: 'This is the last chance'
- Thread starter Friday on my mind
- Start date
Here's data from the NASA web site debunking your point. NASA is a nonpartisan organization. Right wing propaganda is so easy to disprove. It's like taking candy from a baby.
No conspiracy theories.
The FACTS are that the mean temp of this planet has been COOLING for ten years.
The FACTS are that ANY planet with a predominantly WATER terrain (75% here, remember?) has temperature fluctuaions, and this planet has seen a general COOLING trend since the EARLY 40s. IN the mid 70s we were headed for an ICE AGE.
Do you know exactly WHAT TIME OF YEAR this documentary was filmed and exactly WHEN they took those Pictures?
The OZONE layer has ALWAYS had a hole in it. It changes with seasons and with time.
The biggest problem is people who believe what they are spoon fed and refuse to look at other sides of the issue.
The fact is that if algore actually believed this bullshit, his mansion in Nashville would not use nearly 20 TIMES the electricity of a normal home. I live not far from this guy, it is common knowledge here that he is full of crap, he makes 200 GRAND for speaking engagements, flies on a PRIVATE PLANE and REFUSES to even debate this crap.
The whole house of cards that IS "Global Warming" is losing credibility EVERY DAY.
I have paid attention to both sides and have heard the OPINIONS of both sides.
To actually think that humans can affect the entire ecosystem of this planet is ludicrous and arrogant.
Arrogance has always been the Achilles heel of human beings, we are flawed that way.
The FACTS are that the mean temp of this planet has been COOLING for ten years.
The FACTS are that ANY planet with a predominantly WATER terrain (75% here, remember?) has temperature fluctuaions, and this planet has seen a general COOLING trend since the EARLY 40s. IN the mid 70s we were headed for an ICE AGE.
Do you know exactly WHAT TIME OF YEAR this documentary was filmed and exactly WHEN they took those Pictures?
The OZONE layer has ALWAYS had a hole in it. It changes with seasons and with time.
The biggest problem is people who believe what they are spoon fed and refuse to look at other sides of the issue.
The fact is that if algore actually believed this bullshit, his mansion in Nashville would not use nearly 20 TIMES the electricity of a normal home. I live not far from this guy, it is common knowledge here that he is full of crap, he makes 200 GRAND for speaking engagements, flies on a PRIVATE PLANE and REFUSES to even debate this crap.
The whole house of cards that IS "Global Warming" is losing credibility EVERY DAY.
I have paid attention to both sides and have heard the OPINIONS of both sides.
To actually think that humans can affect the entire ecosystem of this planet is ludicrous and arrogant.
Arrogance has always been the Achilles heel of human beings, we are flawed that way.
Could you please provide the source of these facts.
Yeah brought to you from that nice group that is doing their best to FUND their organization and who brought those "facts" that were doctored to make a point for gore's movie.
PLEASE their credibility is shot, they get paid to do RESEARCH! It is how they are FUNDED.
PLEASE If they find nothing out of the ordinary, funding goes BYE BYE.
Here's a few things to help you out.
Here is a peak at their AGENDA
"A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources."
Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth
A couple web addresses for you...
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=f6fa4aca-61b4-4824-adb4-78eb8fa9081a
Yep sounds likely to me.
http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/19842304.html
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64734
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm
From that bastion of right wing views the BBC.
See there is this giant yellow ball that you might notice in passing each day. Sometimes it heats up and sometimes not so much.
IT is called the sun and it has more bearing on the temperature of the planet than ANYTHING ELSE that exists.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23411799-7583,00.html
Not that it will make any difference, liberals are NOT noted for their open minds.
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0208/0208sun.htm
And one more
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88520025
Last edited by a moderator:
I am no scientist.
There are scientific studies that fit everybody's liking. If you think it is right, you'll find many studies prooving it. If you don't think it is right, you'll find many studies prooving it.
Somenone wrote : Follow the money trail...
Those who say it is a hoax. I can see who are the people that don't want things to change and want to continue to make money with the business they are doing. A drastic change of our habits would produce a drastic change of their income.
Those who say that it is true. I find it harder to see how they plan to make money out of that. The situation they describe is far from beng a situation that is good for business.
I believe it is true and a real treat.
But, even if it is prooven that global warming was a hoax, I still prefer the values put forward by those who claim it is real and dangerous.
Having more respect of the environment, nature and animals, reducing spendings, etc...
There are scientific studies that fit everybody's liking. If you think it is right, you'll find many studies prooving it. If you don't think it is right, you'll find many studies prooving it.
Somenone wrote : Follow the money trail...
Those who say it is a hoax. I can see who are the people that don't want things to change and want to continue to make money with the business they are doing. A drastic change of our habits would produce a drastic change of their income.
Those who say that it is true. I find it harder to see how they plan to make money out of that. The situation they describe is far from beng a situation that is good for business.
I believe it is true and a real treat.
But, even if it is prooven that global warming was a hoax, I still prefer the values put forward by those who claim it is real and dangerous.
Having more respect of the environment, nature and animals, reducing spendings, etc...
Facetious
Moderated
Our environment and atmosphere is dynamic, not static. You guys know this ! All you need to know is "Interglacial" Trust me.
I often wonder what disciplinary measures that the Chinese might eventually incur from "The last chance" crowd I'll go out on a limb here and theorize that it's quite likely that the Chinese govt. "lobby up" our politicians who then vote no • no • no on our domestic energy projects. ie - prevent America from acquiring our own natural resources and prevent us from building a greater number of clean nuclear energy plants.
It's not brain surgery.
BTW - Aren't the Chinese bringing up approx 2 new coal ore fired energy plants with every passing week ?
Furthermore - Why should we worry about this issue when we know that the world government {illuminoti :eek:} is effectively working on a clandestine plan to rid 2 / 3 of human life on earth.
I often wonder what disciplinary measures that the Chinese might eventually incur from "The last chance" crowd
I'll go out on a limb here and theorize that it's quite likely that the Chinese govt. "lobby up" our politicians who then vote no • no • no on our domestic energy projects. ie - prevent America from acquiring our own natural resources and prevent us from building a greater number of clean nuclear energy plants.It's not brain surgery.
BTW - Aren't the Chinese bringing up approx 2 new coal ore fired energy plants with every passing week ?
Furthermore - Why should we worry about this issue when we know that the world government {illuminoti :eek:} is effectively working on a clandestine plan to rid 2 / 3 of human life on earth.
Last edited by a moderator:
86150...you actually quoted a San Diego weatherman (a man noted for his Friday night signoffs to his "forecasts"...) Haha! Nice scholarly source there...
I think I remember a recent National Georgraphic issue with a shot of the Alaska ice pack and it was frightening to see.
Global Warming is real. What your pal John Coleman didn't include in his essay was what happens to all that CO2 when San Diego keeps clearing away trees and plants to laydown the next McMansion subdivision...hint: big storms, fires, ruination.
Excess CO2 in the atmosphere leads to raising temps on the surface. Raising temps on the surface lead to no human life...eventually.
Plain and simple.
I think I remember a recent National Georgraphic issue with a shot of the Alaska ice pack and it was frightening to see.
Global Warming is real. What your pal John Coleman didn't include in his essay was what happens to all that CO2 when San Diego keeps clearing away trees and plants to laydown the next McMansion subdivision...hint: big storms, fires, ruination.
Excess CO2 in the atmosphere leads to raising temps on the surface. Raising temps on the surface lead to no human life...eventually.
Plain and simple.
86150.. I guess I should know better than to ask for proof because you can find anything on the internet. Your sources represent a minority within a minority. The argument that there is no global warming has been left behind by its proponents. The melting of the poplar ice caps have settled it. The augment now is what's causing the warming, not if it's happening. Oh well I'll bet you can't get everybody to even agree what time it is. :dunno:
It's funny how people like 86150 ignore glaring facts like:
1. The Polar Ice caps are melting
2. There are no more Glaciers in Glacier National Park
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacier_National_Park_(U.S.)#Glaciers
3. World carbon dioxide levels highest in 650,000 years
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/13/carbonemissions.climatechange
I could list plenty more. (be sure to look at the glacier national park link. It's pretty definitive)
1. The Polar Ice caps are melting
2. There are no more Glaciers in Glacier National Park
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacier_National_Park_(U.S.)#Glaciers
3. World carbon dioxide levels highest in 650,000 years
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/13/carbonemissions.climatechange
I could list plenty more. (be sure to look at the glacier national park link. It's pretty definitive)
Rattrap
Doesn't feed trolls and would appreciate it if you
And that's the kicker. It's happening! I don't even need to read up or see disappearing glaciers to know that - I can just tell you about the wacky and warmer and warmer weather I see every year.
So it's happening, as most people agree. Those that are less inclined to feel the severity of it tend to point out much older cultures dealing with such times of warming (or cooling) that did just fine (such as the Inuits which were mentioned earlier).
However, the world is a very, very different place now. We may be more or less adaptable now (more so with technology, less so culturally), but there's a huge problem - the Inuits didn't have to move around multiple billions of people. I'm willing to bet the human race will survive pretty much anything that happens with the climate, but billions of us are likely going to die first. This whole global warming discussion and debate is pragmatically mostly a way to try and counter that as much as possible.
Emphasis added for divine-like truth.
Ultimately, whether or not we are the cause of what's happening should not matter to our actions. The lifestyles we (us in the countries that can afford to live this way) live incredibly wasteful, often wasted, lives. Things like the Dollar Store, Wal-mart, fast food, SUVs and our ever enlargening landfills serve as shining examples of these excesses. These should end for everyone's benefit - for the other things living on this planet's, this planet's, and our own. We'd certainly be happier for it.
But, these things start with you and me, ultimately. Waiting for government involvement is lazy and a disregard to one's own responsibility. One should be smart about their energy usage and just as importantly their product consumption. Vote to keep local wild areas wild.
Case in point: I just bought a $3 tooth brush the other day, when I could've bought six for the same price. Why? It's made from entirely recycled materials - 100%. Not only that, they have instructions on mailing it back in its case when I'm finished so the company can recycle it again. Moving away from the disposable lifestyle is one of the many things we need to do to help avoid future catastrophe, or at least should be doing if nothing else for a happier us.
youwanttoshagme
Closed Account
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/spm/region-en.pdf
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srren.pdf
http://www-wds.worldbank.org/extern...093016&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=523679
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=2080d8f6867d206f4fc0a30a4a221197
- A lot of useful information.
If it isn't direct form the journal reports, I am unlikely to interested. News reports etc all have bias. And as for quoting a weatherman.........
The reports that I read and the people I liaise with are not Joe Bloke from the street. For all the ney sayers to climate change who believe it is a conspiracy, or think it is for political motivations, I say get a life. Seriously, those that are objecting to the changes, or bring up these arguments that say it's just part of the Earths cycle etc, how do you propose to feed and power a global population that is far greater than it ever has been before?
I can hear a lot of ignorant, naive and down right stupid people being very quick to criticise, but they are always the last people to work towards solutions to energy, food and the environment.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srren.pdf
http://www-wds.worldbank.org/extern...093016&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=523679
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=2080d8f6867d206f4fc0a30a4a221197
- A lot of useful information.
If it isn't direct form the journal reports, I am unlikely to interested. News reports etc all have bias. And as for quoting a weatherman.........
The reports that I read and the people I liaise with are not Joe Bloke from the street. For all the ney sayers to climate change who believe it is a conspiracy, or think it is for political motivations, I say get a life. Seriously, those that are objecting to the changes, or bring up these arguments that say it's just part of the Earths cycle etc, how do you propose to feed and power a global population that is far greater than it ever has been before?
I can hear a lot of ignorant, naive and down right stupid people being very quick to criticise, but they are always the last people to work towards solutions to energy, food and the environment.
Hansen the Nasa scientist saying this is an advisor to Gore and Nasa is very clear on this as are all the national academy's of science in the world and every other scientific group like the UN that has studied it.The science is clear and really the debate should be over.The only question is how to try to mitigate and deal with it.Here is a link to Nasa.
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/global_warming_worldbook.html
Nobody forces you to look at threads you don't wish to.I resent your playing at moderator and think it is very rude.You don't agree with something thats fine but stop trying to shut down threads you don't like.
Poeple should think about this,whats happening is IMO the biggest threat to mankind in history.It may be that in the end no humans are able to adapt.
I think you are somehow trying to have it both ways.If we can only know about what has transpired on the planet for a short time how is it we know what it was like millions of years ago.Scientific research is how!They can use ice cores to measure Co2 levels for hundreds of thousands of years.Thats how they know the levels are higher now than they were in the past.And they know that those higher levels lead to warming.
Probably true,unfortunately.
While I think it is proven science,your outlook is still very reasonable.
It's amazing ,the nay sayers think it is somehow plausible that the scientists warning of this are doing if for money and have a secret agenda or something.That is really weak as an arguement.All the financial incentives are on the denial side.Just think if the scientist at Nasa was willing to call it a hoax,how much would the oil companies be willing to pay for that?Even the oil companies have given up on the funding of the denials as they acknowledge the science is now overwhelming.And If I can I will definately rep you for mentioning the population which really is the driving factor in this.This is all new ground mankind is breaking in the last hundred or so years.We have transformed things and while a lot of that was positive it is clearly possible for it to go to an extreme which it is has reached.
But we really need to move past these debates about the truth of it and move on to trying to figure out the best way to do what Hansen says we have a very short time to do which is reduce the Co2 levels or the consquences will be something we don't even want to be begin to see although we already are.
PS: I just want acknowledge they were many other fine posts that I did not quote trying to tell the what is obviously true to the nay sayers.
youwanttoshagme
Closed Account
(Bold added just to highlight a key point)
If anything, the financial incentives are actually now going the other way, to promote innovation of clean technologies. This doesn't mean that scientist are doing this with their own self interests, but as more become more interested, there is more funding to ask more questions and find out more.
The scientific community is by large apolitical no matter what people on this board say, however you do have to consider where the financial funding is coming from (BBSRC v's Shell?). But as scientists, we depend on our reputations more than anything, so are more likely to report findings that self promote without jepordising personal credibility, than to publish a peer review with a funders motivation behind it. Re-calculating the effects, causes and responses to climate change will always continue, as the models on which our predictions are based on will be continually challenged, improved and refined (hence global cooling v's global warming v's climate change)
The economic view of this is the movement of VC money from Silicone Valley into the Biotechnology and renewable energy industries. If you have money to invest, you are far more likely to make a large profit on technologies mitigating climate change technologies (even if you still think it is a hoax) than you would through investment in mineral reserves (oil, coal, gas etc). With national mandates on CO2 emissions, even the big fossil fuel based companies are investing as they know that the pressure of change is inevitable.
the earth has gone through some many warming and cooling trends over the past 4 billions years or so, just because CO2 levels are above what they were a few thoudsands years ago means nothing, a few melting glacers and everyone is up in arms. what about in the 70's when they though were were going into an ice age??
youwanttoshagme
Closed Account
^ That simple eh?
How about the correlation between industrial processing and global temperatures linked to ice cover, sea temp. and salination of arctic waters in the Atlantic? How about the contribution of over 6 billion people to the alteration of the Earths environment?
This typifies the ignorant and naive perspective I highlighted in my previous post above.
How about the correlation between industrial processing and global temperatures linked to ice cover, sea temp. and salination of arctic waters in the Atlantic? How about the contribution of over 6 billion people to the alteration of the Earths environment?
This typifies the ignorant and naive perspective I highlighted in my previous post above.
Not only that but I am old enough to remember the 70s very well.While there may have been a few scientists saying something about a coming ice age there was not anything like the consensus and agreement there is among scientists today about whats happening.
dave_rhino
Closed Account
I wish I could live for another 200 years. When global warming still continues after completely cutting out all CO2 emissions, someone has to stand up and say "Oh, well, I guess we were wrong. Sorry folks!"
I'd love to see it.
I'd love to see it.
We will never eliminate the emissions.Doubtfull we can even reduce them or even worse stop the growth in emissions especially with the rapidly increasing world population.More people ,more emissions probably no matter what we do.The guy at Nasa who I think's credibilty is beyond reproach says this.
"James Hansen told Congress on Monday that the world has long passed the "dangerous level" for greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and needs to get back to 1988 levels. He said Earth's atmosphere can only stay this loaded with man-made carbon dioxide for a couple more decades without changes such as mass extinction, ecosystem collapse and dramatic sea level rises."
So one of the country's foremost experts on the issue if not the foremost one says we got couple decades.So for sure according to him you will live long enough to see the big effects.It is already well along with the melting of the glaciers and ice caps.
The only thing I might admit about this is maybe we should ignore it and have a drink.:beer:
But when we sober up it will still be true.:eek:
Jagger69
Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
This statement is simply untrue. Here are data collected by the Goddard Institute in reference to mean temperature comparisons since 1880:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif
Similar threads
