Global Warming?

[mostly_gas]

Cognitive dissonance does not explain the mentality of global warming deniers. Scientific facts in any form can easily be dismissed with out a thought. Literally. And then there are simply the trolls. In any event, we're all going to be punished for the disastrous conduct of rulers of the New World Order.

Climate change skeptic and physicist Richard Muller co-founded the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project three years ago to debunk global warming fears, even getting a $150,000 grant from the conservative Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation for his work.

Today, however, he writes in the New York Times:

"Call me a converted skeptic... humans are almost entirely the cause."

"My total turnaround, in such a short time, is the result of careful and objective analysis by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project... Our results show that the average temperature of the earthç—´ land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely

Do you understand the difference between opinion and fact? Does likely imply fact or opinion?

 

[Combustix]

Somebody want to open a window it's getting warm in here

 

[toppop52]

Richard Muller: 'Humans Are Almost Entirely The Cause' Of Climate Change





"Humans are almost entirely the cause" of climate change, according to a scientist who once doubted that global warming even existed.

Last year, Richard Muller walked back years of climate change skepticism in light of new research. But Sunday's comments go one step further.

Muller wrote in an NYT op-ed that after exhaustive research, he believes that an increase of greenhouse gases can be closely linked to the rise in the earth's temperature."

Muller, a UCBerkeley professor, founded the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, which receives substantial funding from GOP powerhouse donor Charles Koch.

According to Greenpeace, the Koch brothers have given over $61 million to groups that deny the existence of climate change."

Loren

And many say he's full of crap, so how does that absolutely prove jack, exactly? It's all one view vs another and neither can prove their point. They say the best predictor of future events are past events. Past events tell us earth has warmed and cooled many times over history, absolutely none of those could have been caused by man. Why is this one? Please don't post another opinion, show some empirical proof or just admit you can't. I can't prove it's not man made, but past evidence certainly indicates it isn't. You don't have past evidence to prove it is. Again show me the proof, not someone's opinion. Get back to me when you can and we'll revive this debate, until then it's over. I'll check now and then.

 

[toppop52]

There are about 7 billion humans onboard now who are burning billions of tons of fossil fuels that were being formed in the past.

Loren

Then explain why the past events were virtually identical with some variation in temp and timing between events which seems consistent over eons? No 7 billion then.:thumbsup:

 

[toppop52]

View attachment 275218

Click on the image for a better view

Cognitive dissonance does not explain the mentality of global warming deniers. Scientific facts in any form can easily be dismissed with out a thought. Literally. And then there are simply the trolls. In any event, we're all going to be punished for the disastrous conduct of rulers of the New World Order.

Maybe the HAARP program and all that chemical spraying during the Bush/Cheney regime is a part of this as well?

HAARP-- What is HAARP IS HAARP Dangerous HAARP and Weather Control.flv - YouTube


Climate Study Forces Koch-Funded Skeptic to Admit Humans Driving Warming

Climate change skeptic and physicist Richard Muller co-founded the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project three years ago to debunk global warming fears, even getting a $150,000 grant from the conservative Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation for his work.

Today, however, he writes in the New York Times:

"Call me a converted skeptic... humans are almost entirely the cause."

"My total turnaround, in such a short time, is the result of careful and objective analysis by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project... Our results show that the average temperature of the earth痴 land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases."

"These findings are stronger than those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations group that defines the scientific and diplomatic consensus on global warming."

Wow Novim, Berkley Earth,HAARP and you want someone to take you seriously? :laughing:

 

[Egon]

Somebody want to open a window it's getting warm in here

Be careful, one of the Moat Trolls may want to come inside!

 

[Egon]

Wow Novim, Berkley Earth,HAARP and you want someone to take you seriously? :laughing:

Naw, it ain't them fellows doing it. It got started away back during the Cold War when the Russians built all those huge arrays of towers and dishes and such trying to see where they couldn't see! Most of them are abandoned now.

 

[Loren49]

Toppop52 quote "Then explain why the past events were virtually identical with some variation in temp and timing between events which seems consistent over eons? No 7 billion then. "

Earth was not inhabited by mammals in those days...our release of CO2 back into the atmosphere may be accelerating a return to those conditions.

Loren

 

[Loren49]

And many say he's full of crap, so how does that absolutely prove jack, exactly? It's all one view vs another and neither can prove their point. They say the best predictor of future events are past events. Past events tell us earth has warmed and cooled many times over history, absolutely none of those could have been caused by man. Why is this one? Please don't post another opinion, show some empirical proof or just admit you can't. I can't prove it's not man made, but past evidence certainly indicates it isn't. You don't have past evidence to prove it is. Again show me the proof, not someone's opinion. Get back to me when you can and we'll revive this debate, until then it's over. I'll check now and then.

No disagreement that conditons have cycled. The rate of the cycle is the issue...the scientific community concludes that it is likely that man's activity is contributing to the acceleration of the cycle.

As you must know, nothing in science is proven beyond a doubt. Its the nature of science. Climate scientists' professional opinions is the best we have. Of course the deniers use this to discount anyhting they don't agree with.

Deny, deny, deny...reaccuse.

The best predictor of future events is past events......really. Proof or support of that statement. Example....the Hudson River was not polluted by PCBs for 10,000 years therefore it will never happen:thumbsup:

Loren
Loren

Loren

 

[mostly_gas]

No disagreement that conditons have cycled. The rate of the cycle is the issue...the scientific community concludes that it is likely that man's activity is contributing to the acceleration of the cycle.

As you must know, nothing in science is proven beyond a doubt. Its the nature of science. Climate scientists' professional opinions is the best we have. Of course the deniers use this to discount anyhting they don't agree with.

Really? On what basis do you conclude that? There was quite a bit of effort expended to figure out how to prove Einstein's theory of Relativity. If scientists can establish whether or not a gas contributes to the greenhouse effect, what can they not put a number to the amount of heat retained by the additional CO2?