Global Warming?

[Dustier]

Baloney.

 

[Rainbody]

Temps are effected by surrounding infrastructure. Thats "settled science".

 

[crash325]

Whatever your question is can be found in scientific papers. Read.

In an op-ed published on Saturday, Hansen explained that the new analysis, which looked at the past six decades:

revealed a stunning increase in the frequency of extremely hot summers, with deeply troubling ramifications for not only our future but also for our present.

This is not a climate model or a prediction but actual observations of weather events and temperatures that have happened. Our??? analysis shows that it is no longer enough to say that global warming will increase the likelihood of extreme weather and to repeat the caveat that no individual weather event can be directly linked to climate change. To the contrary, our analysis shows that, for the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change. (emphasis added)

You don't distinguish yourself with constant negative, snarky retorts designed to dodge the issue. I have yet to read any troll's thoughtful opinion on the matter of global warming or any scientific paper that might refute any science based conclusions.

So, just like the snarky post above, there is nothing that could even remotely be considered definitive on science. Opinions are free and do not require evidence and thus serve only to express what you "believe". Complaining about science you reject out-of-hand is juvenile.

Looks like we have another "Full Blown" scientist on board. WOW am I ever impressed.
Course one would think that a real scientist he would not have to resort to calling people names.
60 Years is squat in the big picture and a real scientist would know that.

 

[houstonscott]

WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord | Environment | The Guardian

Some of what we are talking about.

HS

 

[Gator6x4]

Looks like we have another "Full Blown" scientist on board. WOW am I ever impressed.
Course one would think that a real scientist he would not have to resort to calling people names.
60 Years is squat in the big picture and a real scientist would know that.

60 years maybe "Squat" in the big picture, but temperatures are breaking 100 year records. Either way, 60 years or 100 years I don't think I would venture into the Midwest where farmers are experiencing total devastation, loss of millions and future livelihood and tell one of them there is no such thing as climate change.

Wait until later this year and next when the higher food and gas prices reach the consumer. The number of consumable and consumer product that corn or corn products are used in is staggering.

 

[toppop52]

60 years maybe "Squat" in the big picture, but temperatures are breaking 100 year records. Either way, 60 years or 100 years I don't think I would venture into the Midwest where farmers are experiencing total devastation, loss of millions and future livelihood and tell one of them there is no such thing as climate change.

Wait until later this year and next when the higher food and gas prices reach the consumer. The number of consumable and consumer product that corn or corn products are used in is staggering.

Sounds like the Dust Bowl of the 30's. AGW didn't cause that either.

 

[turnkey4099]

WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord | Environment | The Guardian

Some of what we are talking about.

HS

And after several investigations the adjustents were found to be valid and there was no hanky panky. The denialists hate that fact though.

Hary K

 

[LWG]

Greenland was once warm enough to grow olives. Now, it looks like the inside of a freezer. What caused the Medieval Optimum? Too many Viking Funerals?

 

[Lady Tonka]

"Tin-foil" (to you denialists) food for thought:

We know Earth's temperature is nearly one degree Centigrade higher than it was at the beginning of the industrial revolution. And 1 C is catastrophic, as indicated by a decades-old cover-up. Already, we've triggered several positive feedbacks, none of which were expected to occur by mainstream scientists until we reached 2 C above baseline global average temperature.

We also know that the situation is far worse than indicated by recent data and models (which are reviewed in the following paragraphs). We've known for more than a decade what happens when the planes stop flying: Because particulates were removed when airplanes were grounded, Earth warmed by more than 1 C in the three days following 11 September 2001. In other words, Earth's temperature is already about 2 C higher than the industrial-revolution baseline. And because of positive feedbacks, 2 C leads directly and rapidly to 6 C, acidification-induced death of the world's oceans, and the near-term demise of **** sapiens. We can't live without life-filled oceans, home to the tiny organisms that generate half the planet's oxygen while comprising the base of the global food chain (contrary to the common belief that Wal-Mart forms the base of the food chain). So much for the wisdom of the self-proclaimed wise ape.

...Every day, we have more reliable knowledge about the abyss into which we have plunged. Consider, for example, the International Energy Agency's forecast of business-as-usual leading to a 6 C warmer planet by 2035. Malcolm Light, writing for the Arctic Methane Emergency Group, considers one of the many positive feedbacks we've triggered in one planetary region and reaches this conclusion: this process of methane release will accelerate exponentially, release huge quantities of methane into the atmosphere and lead to the demise of all life on earth before the middle of this century.

Guy McPherson: We're Done | CollapseNet

This thread will probably still be active by then, and we'll know who's right after all. In the meantime, carry on and party hardy!

 

[toppop52]

Greenland was once warm enough to grow olives. Now, it looks like the inside of a freezer. What caused the Medieval Optimum? Too many Viking Funerals?

They prefer to ignore all previous warming periods, many much warmer than today and faster to onset. I've asked a dozen tomes sNd they ignore that inconvenient truth.
During Medieval warming the British Isles were producing two grain crops a year, hasn't happened since and certainly not in the blasting heat furnace of today's imagination.

 

[LWG]

They prefer to ignore all previous warming periods, many much warmer than today and faster to onset. I've asked a dozen tomes sNd they ignore that inconvenient truth.
During Medieval warming the British Isles were producing two grain crops a year, hasn't happened since and certainly not in the blasting heat furnace of today's imagination.

The real tragedy of this is that the AGW people think they are really supported by "science." Hansen, the University of Easy Access and the like are, to me, nothing more than prostitutes plying their trade among the government grant johns, who in turn are selling this bunk in order to deprive us of even more liberty.

I will begin to give them some credence when the UN and governmental "meetings" are held by videoconference, rather than at some tropical resort requiring the burning of tens of thousands of gallons of jet fuel and gasoline.

 

[newbury]

I bet the 5 other liberals think you're just hilarious!

If I actually thought you could comprehend I could reply to you.

 

[toppop52]

If I actually thought you could comprehend I could reply to you.

If I actually thought you had a valid point at any time,I might give a ****!

 

[newbury]

If I actually thought you had a valid point at any time,I might give a ****!

Good reply, concealed profanity.

 

[toppop52]

Good reply, concealed profanity.

Just because it's not allowed unconcealed. People that condescend, profess great knowledge and pick around the edges, while trying to cover for their own inability to answer a simple question, get boring after a while. You seem like a really smart guy, if you can't answer the question about the previous warming periods but insist on defending AGW, it reflects badly on you.

 

[SPYDERLK]

I bet the 5 other liberals think you're just hilarious!

If I actually thought you could comprehend I could reply to you.

If I actually thought you had a valid point at any time,I might give a ****!

The tactic is to insist on absolute proof of the unprovable. ... Then insist that the premise is false because only highly cohesive supportive information can be offered as proof. A wholly science free nit pic tactic, great for those who are fooled into believing that it is valid. ... but very bad for everybody if the "unprovable" was right.
larry

 

[mostly_gas]

The tactic is to insist on absolute proof of the unprovable. ... Then insist that the premise is false because only highly cohesive supportive information can be offered as proof. A wholly science free nit pic tactic, great for those who are fooled into believing that it is valid. ... but very bad for everybody if the "unprovable" was right.
larry

Would be nice to know why the green house effect of CO2 is unprovable.
Knowing the effects of CO2 would help in managing man effects (if significant). That project would be a black hole for money with clearly defined measurable objectives.
How would it be for everyone if the unprovable is wrong?

 

[jefwyn]

The same guys that argue that global warming is not possible, are the same ones that argued to the bitter end that the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. I don't get it.

 

[/pine]

The same guys that argue that global warming is not possible, are the same ones that argued to the bitter end that the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. I don't get it.

I don't think you understand the argument...for starters, the correct term is "climate change" and I don't think you will find many folks (including agoraphobics) that have not realized some "climate change"...

The crux of the argument is "AGW" meaning that greenhouse gasses (and their release by human activity) are directly responsible for said climate changes...

get it now ?

 

[Redneck in training]

The same guys that argue that global warming is not possible, are the same ones that argued to the bitter end that the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. I don't get it.

They also believe that wrestling is real.:laughing: