The Ugly undeniable Truth

[dave1949]

The thing that ticks me off about many in the global warming crowd, i.e. Al Gore, is that they are a bunch of hypocrites. I'm willing to bet that his carbon footprint is way bigger than mine, but he justifies it by purchasing renewable energy credits. He should try leading by example, but that will never happen.
Gore isn't quite as green as he's led the world to believe - USATODAY.com

What people think about Al, or his carbon footprint, is not going to change the chemistry of carbon and is irrelevant to the outcome.

 

[Gary Fowler]

The earth's climate changes all the time as the weather patterns change. How do you think we got oil reserves in the frozen arctic. It was once a tropical jungle but it changed to frozen snow grounds. It will change back someday just as it has before, thankfully it is a slow process so we humans can adapt if we don't kill each other in the meantime.
We as humans might be able to slow it down by a day or two but it will still change. Mother earth can put more carbon (CO2) into the air in a few hours from volcanic eruptions than all humans can in a year. Sure we add to the problem, but we aren't the problem. Climate changes occur at a frequent schedule without human intervention, so stop worrying yourself about what damage we are doing because we aren't going to change anything. It is going to happen regardless of the human role.

 

[EddieWalker]

Nice pictures. They show nature at her finest. Beautiful countryside. Of course, it had nothing to do with global warming without taking into account the entire globe. Just more proof that you have to be dishonest to push something that doesn't exist. If you have to lie to prove your point, then you don't really have a point.

If the planet is warming and we where somehow able to lower the temperature of the planet, how many degrees should we lower the temperature to? Funny thing is nobody can answer this because in every period of history when the planet was warmer, society did better. When the planet cools, society suffers. Since the man made global warming crowd is saying that the planet is too hot, what year or decade where we at the proper temperature?

The cure to man made global warming is to stop the government from giving money out to those who support it.

Eddie

 

[oldballs]

Serenity Prayer
God grant me the serenity to accept the thing I cannot change;
the courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference.

Now "Smog".....that's a different thing in my book.

 

[dodge man]

My problem with the entire global warming thing is the experts say they know, like its fact. Is it possible the earth is warming up long term, yes. Is it possible man is the problem, yes. Do the experts know this for a fact, no. I still remember a friend of mine giving a talk in one of my classes in school. This would have been early 1970's, and his talk was on global cooling and the next ice age coming soon. That's what the experts were saying just 40 years ago.

 

[vulcancowboy]

My problem with the entire global warming thing is the experts say they know, like its fact. Is it possible the earth is warming up long term, yes. Is it possible man is the problem, yes. Do the experts know this for a fact, no. I still remember a friend of mine giving a talk in one of my classes in school. This would have been early 1970's, and his talk was on global cooling and the next ice age coming soon. That's what the experts were saying just 40 years ago.

Exactly! I remember those days too. And if memory serves, the great global warming expert Ted Danson in 1988 predicted that we only had 10 years to live because the oceans would be dead. Hmmm, not so much. In 2007 Al Gore predicted that by 2014 all Artic ice could be gone. Again, something went awry with that dire prediction. Let's not forget the photo op of the Polar bear floating (no doubt to his demise in the man-made, boiling ocean water) on the piece of ice. This has also been proven a fallacy.

Look, I am the first one to admit we have a responsibility to be good stewards of the earth that we have been given, but let's not create a calamity just to line the pockets of a few on the backs of the uninformed.

<climbing off soapbox now! >

 

[mark02tj]

The cure to man made global warming is to stop the government from giving money out to those who support it.

Eddie brings up a GREAT point! Much of the "global warming" studies are funded by government money. If any of the researchers determine that the changes (which few dispute) are natural and not man-made then all of the sudden their jobs are irrelevant and subject to elimination. As long as they can convince the people in control of the money that it's all connected to human action and they will find the "solution", then the money keeps flowing to them. I think that one thing that supports this opinion is that "global warming" has now been re-termed as "climate change". That way those folks can say that if the summer is hotter, it's due to man made climate change. And, when we have super cold winters (like last year), it's also due to man made climate change.

In the original link, I noticed that few, if any, of the "before" pictures were dated - even with a date range. I did see one pair of pictures where the "before" picture was supposedly taken in "late winter to early summer" but the "after" picture was taken in late August. Hardly a fair comparison.

In my area, I do see the visual effects of climate change though. Our entire area has huge deposits sand and gravel left here when the glaciers retreated 15,000 or so years ago. We also have super abundant supplies of water in underground aquifers. The terminus of the glacier was about 5 miles north of me. North of that terminus (the "moraine") the land is very flat as the glacier acted like a huge bulldozer. South of the moraine it's very hilly. Obviously it was a major climate change that created that glacier. And another major climate change event caused them to retreat. I doubt if man had much to do with either event. No real reason to think that things are different now.

 

[dave1949]

Nice pictures. They show nature at her finest. Beautiful countryside. Of course, it had nothing to do with global warming without taking into account the entire globe. Just more proof that you have to be dishonest to push something that doesn't exist. If you have to lie to prove your point, then you don't really have a point.

If the planet is warming and we where somehow able to lower the temperature of the planet, how many degrees should we lower the temperature to? Funny thing is nobody can answer this because in every period of history when the planet was warmer, society did better. When the planet cools, society suffers. Since the man made global warming crowd is saying that the planet is too hot, what year or decade where we at the proper temperature?

The cure to man made global warming is to stop the government from giving money out to those who support it.

Eddie

I guess we should cut Pentagon spending, they support it and are spending plenty to prepare for the coming effects, as are many private concerns.

The question is not what is the ideal temperature. The primary question is how much temperature change can we afford? We have significant infrastructure investments including developed agricultural and fisheries capabilities around the globe that are geographically tied to and depend upon relatively stable climate conditions. Hardly any of that infrastructure existed in cold or warm past times nor was the then scant human population nearly as dependent upon it.

Answering that primary question will tell us what the ideal temperature is, and what the rate of affordable temperature change is. If you think about it, you will be rooting for climate stability. Climate change driven by man-made global warming is destabilizing by definition.

Climate change is resulting in habitat alterations. Changing habitat creates "winners and losers" among species--usually noted by how good or bad the result is for humans. A receding glacier may leave behind what looks like beautiful countryside to humans but beneath that appearance the hydrology and biome of an entire area has been altered. To an anadromous fish that spawns in rivers fed by glacial/snowpack melt, it's not so nice. Temperate river and lake fish may replace the losers, but they may not produce ocean-going feed fish for saltwater species, which in turn impacts those commercial fisheries that feed many people.

New England may actually benefit from warming in terms of agriculture due to longer growing seasons. However, I would hate to try and feed this country on the thin, rocky, nutrient poor soils typical of this region. And, it is expected that the relative northern scarcity of insects harmful to crops would no longer be the case with warmer temperatures.

There is no "lie" involved in the pictures, they speak for themselves. It's rude to call someone a liar because they don't agree with your opinion. As far as the entire globe is concerned, 2014 is on track to be the hottest year on record. It is entirely possible, and happening now, for regional weather--such as a portion of Antarctica-- to change while the globe as a whole warms. That would be the definition of climate change.

Volcanoes do not produce more carbon dioxide than man-made causes--not to mention they have a net climate cooling effect.

The nearest parallel to the human psychology of climate denial-ism I can think of is racial bigotry. People grab onto some insignificant fact, or absolutely a-factual thought, and hold onto it in the face of all rational evidence. Some defend their thoughts more adroitly than others, but bottom line they are all doing the same thing--getting in the way of progress. The best way to cure man-made global warming is to get therapy for those in denial, better allowing the rest of us to get on with the needed fixes.

 

[ruffdog]

Who is funding the "anti climate science" side of the discussion? The link below does work going to Popular Science article about the climate change battle.

Page Unavailable

 

[RSKY]

Hasn't the Earth been cooling for the past 16 years?

Some "warmists" claim the science is "settled". When science becomes settled and no opposing views are allowed doesn't it become religion?

Just a thought.

RSKY