Evidence/impacts of climate change series...(read it before the denier censors it)..
.
Weather changes can affect maple sap production
.
A 2010 report from the U.S. Forest Service and Cornell University showed climate changes already have affected sugar maple trees in the northeastern U.S.
Evidence/impacts of climate change series...(read it before the denier censors it)..
.
How a geographer and a locust expert mapped a path for China's climate efforts
.
What started out as a temporary assignment to the United Nations, according to Niu Wenyuan, a geographer, became his never-ending mission to promote a green growth path for China.
More evidence/impacts of climate change series...(please read article before the denier with all the sock puppet accounts censors it)..
.
EU lawmakers back plan to withhold EU CO2 permits
.
European Union lawmakers backed a proposal on Tuesday to allow the EU Commission to prop up record low carbon prices by withholding 1.4 billion permits from the third phase of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, sending prices 20 percent higher.
"1.4 billion permits from the third phase of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, sending prices 20 percent higher."
Yep..
Since everything depends on oil and coal they are only raisig the cost of living and doing business...which in turrn makespeople spend less and in turn causes slower business in turn causes lay offs, which in turn lower tax revenues..cause closed businesses and fired people cant pay taxes
This is gonna cause a deep recession there if it doesn't crash their Economy outright
Evidence / impacts of climate change series...(read it before the denier with all the sock puppet channels tries to censor it)..
.
As temperatures rise, so do fears of extreme weather
.
It’s mid-December, Christmas just a little more than a week away, but you wouldn’t have been able to guess that Thursday by looking at the weather in Toronto, where the temperature soared to a balmy, but wet 14 degrees.
More climate news...(the denier troll with all the sock puppet channels will try to censor)..
.
Climate change means more Snowtobers
.
New Jersey residents who were slammed by Snowtober, including those still without power, should remember this misery the next time they hear a Republican presidential candidate – or any science-denying elected official – call climate change “a sham.”
The extinction rate is naturally about 40 species A DAY anyway Which comes over that 1 millions species gone "by 2050".....so proving it's from a lack of taxes and getting US to give 100 billion a year to UN to redistribute to countries "effected by Climate Change" is ,ah, difficult to say the least
Besides the AGW prediction.that CO2 can lead tempature rise(though it has never historically happened..ever) means we be extinct when +6 tempature matches 323ppm CO2 and long gone wentemp match 390
@TheRealArchAngel A little more time reading the scientific literature for you so that you aren't creating strawmen or speaking from a position of ignorance.
"A little more time reading the scientific literature for you so that you aren't creating strawmen "'
Strawmen?
he IPCC prediction is specifically that human caused rise in C/O2 can lead tepature when no where in the Historical record it has it ever happened
Al Gores chart of corrolating CO2 spike to tempature and saying the spike in co2 "is sure to cause a rise when more heat is added to the system" is the "AGW hypothises" IPCC presents
Hey, my Associates in Science can get me a real job in the real real world actually fixing or repairing things while all those 3rd string "Scientists" with thier PHDs in Physics,Mathamatics,or Fluid Dynamics can only teach it, study it on grant,and/or vvolunteer thier time to IPCC cause their only practical skill be flipping burgers at Mc Donalds..lol
the 25 million dollar glorified "Sim Earth" still will give crap out if you put crap in
@TheRealArchAngel "will give crap out if you put crap in" is pretty much what happens to scienice illiterates when they source information from denier blogs and then post on YouTube. Why don't you read these IPCC reports in their entirety instead of parroting blogs. My understanding from reading hundreds of peer reviewed papers is that CO2 is a forcing agent, that amplifies warming, not the cause. Thats the strawman pushed by people too lazy to read for themselves.
@TheRealArchAngel so how do you explain the warming over the past 50 years which on average has risen over periods of solar maxima and minima. Also, how many w/m^2 on average difference is reaching the earth between solar maxima and minima?
"how do you explain the warming over the past 50 years which on average has risen over periods of solar maxima and minima"
You mean Phil Jones supposed 1 degree?
It is more likely extreme "climate variability" from Earth heat distribution system variance/irregularity
And since the sun been stuck in solar minimus all this timr "Kosher AGW"..that rise in CO2 levels will asorb the extra heat from sun as Sun heats up and releases more heat hasn't applied yet
Water shortages and rising seas forecast to sweep UK by 2100
.
A quarter of the UK population could suffer more water shortages by the end of the century without urgent action to tackle climate change, the Met Office has warned. An extra 160,000 people across the UK could be put at risk of coastal flooding due to rising sea levels, the Met warned.
Soon as I saw this I thought another "We're all gonna die" fear monger.Then I remember threy usually have a unterior motive so looked up his bio and Suprise suprise - he has 10 books for sale.
The real problem is flying elves (alarm)
we must act now (fear)
before its too late (urgency)
because if you don't there will be huge problems and we all could die (doom and gloom)
buy my book and see for yourself charts and graphs by top scientests
Numerous posts on where is the credible proof to explain climate variation?
Well there is such proof but no one wants to listen. The results demonstrate an unassailable correlation with historic climate data and because the data can be calculated, the future climate patterns can also be calculated, a forecast for the next two decades is shown and we are in for a long cold spell in the Northern hemisphere.
global warming what a load of bollocks......yes it's getting warm and what's causing it?......any why is this fucking music so annoying!!!! put some Led Zeppelin and we can all warm up happy!:)
@gordon7443 "global warming what a load of bollocks......yes it's getting warm and what's causing it?"
so which is it? I mean you have sort of contradicted yourself here. If you're trying to say that the climate is warming but that it isn't because of human activity, what is causing it?
Yet more deep-sea hydrothermal vents on the iceagenowdot com site.
Pumping superheated water into the depths and belching out those co 2 bubbles.
Quote by Jim Sibbison, environmental journalist, former public relations official for the Environmental Protection Agency: "We routinely wrote scare stories...Our press reports were more or less true...We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment."
Try my channel for 2011 real climate science conference,It's called 6th International conference on climate change held in The US.Scroll down the uploads column,they are in no particular order however the Q&A videos should be watched after the others and do read my description of the video.Enjoy
Some people may reject the idea of climate change, but scientists say summer temperatures have been climbing over the years, and it will continue to get hotter over time.
It's these kinds of heat conditions that put many people at risk.
Wiki - Calder is a long-standing sceptic of global warming. As early as 1980, he predicted that within 20 years "the much-advertised heating of the earth by the man-made carbon-dioxide ‘greenhouse’ [will fail] to occur; instead, there [will be] renewed concern about cooling and an impending ice age". Calder participated in the polemic film The Great Global Warming Swindle.
And all that crap about cars and Co2 etc, the natural swamps alone produces waaaaay more GAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSS than that, but let the politicians surfe the global warming wave, poor bastards, they do everything to shine a little bit while the corpse is still warm, just like the journalists.
Conspicuously absent in this debate is the Piri Reis map which was created hundreds of years ago portraying Antarctica as ice free. Interesting. The map is now held in a vault in Washington DC. Where does that map place all these global warming theories?
That map shows Terra Australis, a non-existent massive Southern continent. Gough Island, Tierra Del Fuego, and other small islands were believed to be part of this continent. Terra Australis would be over 3x the size of Antarctica. Getting the Coastlines of Antarctica and Terra Australis to match up involves rotating the latter 70 degrees on its pole.
Technology got is into this mess.... technology is the only thing that will get us out. Oh and social change... many will die, most. Don't be sad, be happy we even got to this point. The odds of life and the odds of intelligent life should have NEVER happened.. but it did. This is the gift and it was given. Think solar power, domes and social change.
@freeadplanet i know that Solar Power isn't so great. It is, from what I hear very high ion radiation. I misplaced the book I read it in, but I read once that there a Solar Powered home in Maine, that was so tightly sealed, at least that's what I remember it said. It said the home was very high in Radiation, living there was like having, I beleive itv said, like having 50 Chest XRAYS a day----The book was by 2 scientists, I beleive there names were Sandy Shaw and a guy , last name Pearson.
The climate controls us not the other way round. The environment allows us to live . We survive due to a hospitable climate and environment which nature can change in the blink of an eye. Please have some humility.
Couldnt agree more, we humans can mess up the nature, but we can not fix it, the human nature is oooh we need to control this... well Moder Nature is in charge, so we got to suck it up, and the future generations need to be able to adapt to the changes. They cant control it. We cant. Well that aint if youre Harry Potter or a bunch of Jedi's.
@ravenwolfs Yes adaptation not alteration. The recent eruption in Iceland along with the cold oceans almost guarentees a cold winter for the northern hemisphere, we can do nothing but adapt.
i feel theat a lock of Global warming is inevitable. i received an E-Mail recently from a friend. it was a scientist who said after, i believe it was a recent earthquake, put so much, i believe he said C02 into the atmosphere, that it negated ALL THE EFFORTS PEOPLE MADE, i believe he said the last 5 years. so, some of it is inevitable. And from what i hear METHANE gas is a big cause of global warming. so people should probably buy BEANO, I've heard it works.
@And also, the people who are the biggest complainers, will they do their part/? Eat foods that aren't so gassy-- And if they feel gassy--- TRY BEANO, OR GET A CORK AND SHUT UP
@xWakizashi you are right when you say we are doomed. and you are right again when you say we have the hability now to change everything, but it won`t happen. we will die, because our leaders will never be able to face the truth in time. we need to stop burning fossil fuels now, but they can think only about money. do you think we are ready to change? we will vanish from existence, there will be no more human beings ever....
@viagemixtlan it sounds like you are probably a GORE fan. i heard yesterday from a friend that Al gore recently made a speech, ranting and raving and swearing. What a jerk. he has the right to his opinions, and the right to voice them, but people need to criticize him. he has no right to ranr, rave and swear. i don't beleive global warming is as bad as people say, he has the right to speak, yet as far as I'm concerned he HURTS the cause of global warming. He makes it into a joke.
@Also, you may not be a GORE fan. just because you believe in Global Warming, doesn'tnecessarily mean that you support him. But if you are a fan of his, or were, find sometbody else to idolize. he's IN MY OPINION ONLY, CRAZY. i read somewhere, can't remember where i read it, that he needs to get back on his medication. He probably wasn't or isn't on it, my opinion only he needs to be seen and treated.
@megavlad888 Better be careful, don't cry too much. Next thing we'll be hearing is that CRYING leads to Global Warming. And the sad part?A bunch of idiots will beleive it
The Arctic is a harsh environment and it is difficult for scientists to get out there and study it in-person. But some of this on-the-ground data is exactly what climate scientists need in order to get a more complete picture of how the Arctic is changing.
@Nightversionn You are so right comrade, teabaggers are racist nazis and are holocaust deniers as well as global warming deniers. Once we can curb the fascist US emissions, global warming will stop. China is leading the way in the green revolution and the fascists lie and say china is the leading polluter, which is just more teabagging racist lies. China is paving the way leading to a clean and renewable future. Keep up the great work comrade
@Nightversionn From what I've understood is change has been going on sincde???? Ever hear of Continental Drift? I know it's just a theory, but I believe it's true. And ever hear of PANGEA? Now that's CHANGE, I know it's a theory, but change is inevitable
The dumbfucks are the ones that listen to anything global warming scientist say. That was the point dumbfuck. These guys have never been right about any prediction they have made.
@n5ifi You could do a more precise job by walking outside wet your finger and sticking it up in the air. The earth is what 4.5 billion years old and you idiots think you can make a prediction about what's happening looking at 30,50 or even a 100 years of that timespan. I've heard this peer review shit until I want to puck. They could a better job by peering up someone ass.
Global warming is killing the midwest right now. There are piles and piles almost 3 feet of global warming all over the midwest. The temperature has sky rocketed to 11 degrees. There is NO way the Earth can stand this heat. I seen cars in ditches everywhere due to global warming. If this continues? The temperature could go as high as 3 to 4 below. God save us from global warming.
@maybe I'm dumb, when you say 3 to 4 below, you are refering to Celsius? or if it is 3-4 fahrenheit, that is COLD. I can't remember how to convert fahrenheit to Celsius, or Vice versa.
@thanks, i also afree that's it's not as bad as people say it is. i have heard that it's from Co2, but from what I've heard, if global warming is true, some of it is inevitable.
C02 never has, and never will be a pollutant. One volcano eruption is the equivalent of 100 years of man made C02... It is a scam, and it always will be... Wake up people.. If anyone tells you they believe that man is causing the earth to be on a irreversible course of destruction because of our C02 emissions? Don't believe a word of it and tell them to seek help.. Unless they are in on the scam,, in that case? Kick them in the ball sack.
@have you heard the saying TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING/ Too much C02 probably isn't good, like too much Fat Soluble vitamins can do real harm. Taken the way you are supposed to , yes, good. i knew a woman that overdosed on Fat Soluble vitamins was very ill, never really recovered, never regained her heath. So too much CO2 could probably kill. but i don't think that's happening. . Also with patients who are on Oxygen, turn it up, esp. people with emphysema, bye bye, not good
@Peggycass i worded myself wrong. i said i don't know how much Oxygen there is supposed to be in the air, I meant the ratio of oxygen with Co2, etc, but as good as it is for us, if C02 suddenly jumped to 10 times the amount it's supposed to be, not good.. it , i am sure could do real harm.
so, yes i agree with you to a pont. co2 goes into the air, i am sure it's not going to hurt. Yet, if it wasn't regulated, or wasn't able to regulate itself,. i feel it could do harm. i cant remember how much oxygen there is supposed to be in the atmosphere, yet if it didn't regulate itself, i think it could be lethal
@Peggycass Okay let's use some logic here.. Let's say that you have a stadium full of people.. Every person in the stadium represents a portion of the atmosphere.. Let's say there is 5000 people in the stadium... On the home team they are wearing the color blue.. The away team is wearing red.. Out of 5000 people the home team has 4996 people and the away team has 4 people. Do you think that the away team can be spotted at a glance? That is how much C02 makes up our atmosphere. Get it?
@SuperGuitarman69 thanks for your education, i did chack on the ratio of Co2 in the atmosphere. in the air we breathe 78% is Nitrogen 21% O2. and 0.35% is Co2. So, using your example of 5000 people, or 5000 particl 0.3% is Co2, 0.3% of 5000 I figure is 15 , not 4, but still not a large amount. I still stand by the fact gthat TOO MUCH of a good thing isn't good. I also don't worry about Global Warming like some do. Some is inevitable, thanks
Please note, in the beginning of my note, I wrote that 0.35% is co2, i meant 0.3%. Still not much. i feel that a lot of Global warming is inevitable. Too bad that the people who go on and on about how bad it is--when you present them with the opposite, gthey don't want to hear it. You'd think they's be happy hearing that it's not as bad as they thought, but no, it's like they want it to be true, too bad
@Peggycass You need to look up the UN's Agenda 21.... It will explain a lot about why there is this BS about global warming, cooling whatever they are calling it now.
@SuperGuitarman69 thanks. i will. i do agree that it is a bunch of BS. I think people may contribute some, but very little. i also wrote today to someone else that i heard that Gore brecently gave a speech, ranting, raving and swearing. What a jerk i also read somewhere that he needs to get back on his medication, HA HA
Doomsdayers have always been wrong? Noah was crazy for building the boat, right?So the great and dreadfull day of the Lord wil not be great for some people?I know there is global warming, wars and rumors of wars, and great wickedness upon the earth but still know the return of the Lord can be a great day if we prepare and live correctly.
So the glaciers really are not melting? Please treat us like adults and leave out the idiotic kiddi statements. This is a problem and ignoring it will not reduce its significance. And no we are not returning all to the same place. Are we all doing the same works? Are we all striving to keep the commandments? And on top of that do we all have the same knowledge of truth? of course not.
@i'm a kid of the fifties. i have heard that the glaciers were melting way back then. i am curious, what do you think would happen if the ice in the Polar regions all melted/ do you think it would flood the entire earth? I it wouldn't. As i said, they have been melting since the fifties, 1950's and probably further back. a lot of it is inevitable.
@sumstuff46 i hope they don't swarm it too much. in the summer where I live, it's so hot and humid. I have asthma, and humidity, heat is hard on me, so BRING ON THE COLD. At least at night so I can sleep. Really hard to sleep when it's hot and humid. I can't have Air Conditioning in my windows, not the right kind of windows. So BRING ON THE COLD, and the sooner the better
Al Gore and Cohorts are laughing their asses off making millions and billions off of stupid people (with and without PhDs, Masters etc.) and enjoying a life with nice homes on beaches, with heated pools, Learjets and classy parties.
@i just posted something, Did you hear that Gore recently gave a speech, ranting , raving and sweraing. i haven't heard the speech yet, but it should be on You Tube. What a jerk
@Peggycass I mean, first, he was groomed to be a president; didn't work out, then he sets up a trade-fraud based on lies....and that's coming down too. So, guess he's really going nuts....lol..
This Global Warming Crime act reminds me of Asterix and Obelix in some kind of trouble (which they always got into), quote: "They sky will fall down on our heads, by Teutates!"
2:16 and what makes those "official scientific studies" trustworthy? If you accuse of Bush having fried the numbers,what would prevent me of believing you did the same thing?Who are you to clain yourself as an authority? What proves you have "only the best" at heart? Who do YOU get paid from? WHOSE interests are you defending? Cui bono? What's in for YOU? Political positions without being elected? Money? Influence? Fame? Awards? Status? Why would that not corrupt you as well as any other person?
In 1970, when environmentalists were making predictions of man made global cooling and the threat of an ice age, what kind of government policy should we have undertaken to prevent such a calamity?
When Ehrlich predicted that England would not exist in the year 2000, what steps should the British Parliament have taken in 1970 to prevent such a dire outcome?
Finally, what makes us think that environmental alarmism is any more correct today than yesterday?
@n5ifi Also, according to global temperature records, the climate was cooling since 1940, then reversed it's trend begining in the mid-1970s. What the fuck do you expect scientists to say when the facts and data changes?
@n5ifi They made projections based on man made aerosols which were increasing in the atmosphere. They saw trends and they pointed those trends out. That's what scientists do, dumbfuck. You want to gag those scientists too? Almost no one was predicting an impending ice age.In fact, there are only two references in peer reviewed journals from the 1970s that postulated global cooling leading to an ice age. Compare that to the number of peer reviewed scientists today who believe in global warming.
At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind." C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said, "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed."
@n5ifi um...you might want to check your facts. Nigel Calder is an anti-environmentalist and a well-known climate denier, and has been predicting an ice age since 1969. He has been wrong all this time and pretty much about everything he's said.
@n5ifi I'll have to check on this guy, Nigel Calder. I wonder if he was a friend of Ira Einhorn? he was a guy who killed his girlfriend, Holly Maddux, year? Don't know for sure. But Einhorn tried to take credit for the First Earth Day. i would find it interesting to see if they were friends---and if yes, i would really question the guy. just curious
@Peggycass Ira Einhorn is actually a nobody piece of crap liar. Ool worn out hippy that killed his girlfriend and then ran all over the world trying to keep from getting caught. He has no opinion as far as I'm concerned. Earth Day was actually started by Wisconsin idiot (image that) Sen. Gaylord Nelson.
@n5ifi I TOTALLY AREE WITH YOU. I never said he was a good guy, i read a book, THE UNICORN'S SECRET, about EINHORN. I just noticed that you brought up the name of Nigel Calder, happened to mention Earth day. I read that Einhorn tried to take credit for the First earth day, and he WASN'T the one who started it. He escaped to Europe. i can't believe there are people who still think he is innocent. Totally DELUDED people. Again, i was just curious whether Nigel Calder was a friend of Einhorn
In 1975, the Environmental Fund warned" The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000." Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind." That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned, that by 1995 "somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." Doomsayers have always been wrong.
We're all returning to the same place anyway no matter what we decide to do. I don't know what all the fuss is about. Death is not that bad, you'll see.
@MrHicks091 Please try and keep up. I said there was a correlation in the rock-strata paleoclimate data between temperature and CO2 but only for a few fleeting million years, but when you look at the entire 600 million years, there is no relationship between CO2 and temperature. All you need to do is look at the link I provided to confirm this. As for ice-core data, there is a correlation going back 800,000 years, but the CO2-changes lag the temperature-changes, on average by 800 years.
@CHIPSTERO7 "As for ice-core data, there is a correlation going back 800,000 years, but the CO2-changes lag the temperature-changes, on average by 800 years." I never claimed otherwise but-like a true Contrarian-you have to put words in people's mouths to win the argument. I pointed out that-though warming was initially driven by increased insolation, the warming event persists for more than 1,000 years *after* insolation peaks. How did that happen-magic?
@MrHicks091 Sure, CO2 and temperature may have both been high during the Ordovician Glacial Period but the global climate system is extremely complex and is capable of existing in a multitude of different states as determined by the values of countless different parameters of which the global atmospheric CO2 concentration is but one. Taking a few instances of a CO2-increase coinciding with a global temperature-increase and claiming it proves CO2 causes global warming is silly to say the least.
@CHIPSTERO7 Hmmm, try the World Radiation Center in Davos, or the Joint Institute for the Study of Atmosphere & Ocean in Washington-or try SORCE as well. There are plenty of good references for solar radiation out there-assuming you're prepared to LOOK. Still, as you're not prepared to provide evidence to back your increasingly flimsy claims, then I *REALLY* don't see any further point "debating" with you-now go hang out with your fellow cultists & discuss the lastest "Evil Conspiracy".
@MrHicks091 This is the paleoclimate data from which you are ignominiously cherrypicking instances of high CO2 and high temperature coinciding: h ttp://csccc.fc pp.org/files/f13.jp g
@MrHicks091 We already know the contribution that CO2 has thanks to IR spectrometer experiments. We don't need unscrupulous scientists like Trenberth twisting the science to support his prejudices.
@CHIPSTERO7 Oh how typical of the Contrarian Crowd-when Peer Reviewed Data doesn't fit with their own strongly held beliefs, they accuse-without PROOF-the scientists behind that data of "twisting the science". You want to provide EVIDENCE to back your claims, or are you just going to keep quoting Jo Nova at me?
@CHIPSTERO7 Virtually every claim you've made can be found in Jo Nova's books. Still, maybe you're not quoting her, maybe its just the kind of GroupThink we've come to expect from you & your kind.
@MrHicks091 The idea that clouds are a net-positive feedback is one that sounds absurd to me and I don't think all the evidence suggests it (Spencer 2008). The IPCC claim that as the world warms we get fewer clouds which pushes up temperature. If this were true though, then where do the negative feedbacks come from to counteract the overwhelming positive feedbacks to keep the temperature within narrow bounds? Surely, the positive feedbacks must be arrested at some point by negative feedbacks?
@MrHicks091 Does CO2 really account for 20% of all the greenhouse effect? According to who? I find this hard to believe considering the fact that water vapour is about one-hundred times more abundant than CO2 and whose greenhouse potency is over 20 times that of CO2 as well. And the temperature being 6C warmer 500 million years ago could have something to do with the enormous amount of volcanism leading to increased air-pressure. That is one possibility. And TSI has not decreased for 30 years.
@CHIPSTERO7 Many scientists have shown-in lab studies-the relative contribution of various gases to the Greenhouse Effect-but the most recent was Kiehl & Trenberth. However, as you limit your reading to the mere smattering of Contrarians out there, I'm not suprised you don't know that. As to the planet 500 million years ago-that volcanism created CO2 levels of 2000ppm-3000ppm-which in turn led to the warmer climate-do please try & keep up, your ignorance is REALLY SHOWING!
@MrHicks091 You might be interested to know that there is absolutely no correlation between CO2 and temperature going backs 500 million years. During the Ordovician period 450 million years ago the planet dropped into one of the worst ice-ages ever and CO2 levels were 5000pppm. We can both cherry-pick instances in the paleoclimatological data to support our assertions. And your claim that "CO2 levels of 2000ppm-3000ppm led to the warmer climate" is something you have yet to offer evidence for.
@CHIPSTERO7 Prior to the Ordovician, CO2 levels in the amtosphere fell from roughly 7,000ppm to about 3,000ppm-followed by a drop in temperatures of around 22 degrees C to little more than 12 degrees C. During the Carboniferous Era, CO2 levels fell from around 3,000ppm to around 500ppm, & temperatures during that period fell from around 20 degrees C to around 14 degrees C. During the Tertiary Period, CO2 fell from 1,000ppm to 300ppm &-again-temps fell from 20 degrees C to around 14 degrees C.
@MrHicks Again, cherry-picking instances when CO2 and temperature were both high does not prove anything. At best the paleoclimate data can give us only a correlation, which merely indicates the possibility of a cause but does not prove it. To assume a cause from a mere correlation is to jump to a conclusion and doing that is in conflict with rational science. A correlation cannot prove that CO2 causes temperature changes any more than it can prove that temperature changes cause changes to CO2.
@CHIPSTERO7 Hilarious. So the fact that 3 of biggest shifts in climate were preceded by massive shifts in CO2 levels is just one huge *coincidence*? I guess the same is true of the warmings that occurred later in each era too? The fact is that you claimed that there's no CORRELATION between CO2 & temperature in the paleo-climate record, but you've now just admitted that I *have* a correlation-so you're contradicting yourself-the sign of someone with a very poorly constructed argument.
@MrHic There is no correlation in rock-strata paleoclimate data going back 600 million years for which I have just provided you with a link. Looking at the graph now I can see that your assertion CO2 levels preceded the shifts in temperature is false. There may be a correlation for a short period of time, say, a few million years. Your argument that these shifts were caused by CO2 is unproven and the ice-core record unequivocally proves that temperature-changes precede corresponding CO2-changes.
@CHIPSTERO7 Sorry, but last I checked there isn't any ice-core data stretching back half a billion years. You're probably incorrectly referring to the interglacial periods of the last half a million years-& I clearly stated that those were *started* by changes in solar radiation-but maintained by increases in CO2-as *any* paleo-climatologist worth their name will tell you-but which you REFUSE to believe 'cause it doesn't fit your Denialist Agenda.
@CHIPSTERO7 Just a moment ago, you were saying there *was* a correlation-make up your mind. There is studies showing more closely the link between CO2 & climate change (particularly the Ordovician Glacial Period) out there-like the work of Herrmann, Patzkowsky and Pollard, or Young et al. Anyway, like I said-bored of you now. Hopefully more open minded people will see how WEAK your entire argument is.
@CHIPSTERO7 " Your argument that these shifts were caused by CO2 is unproven and the ice-core record unequivocally proves that temperature-changes precede corresponding CO2-changes." That's what you said, after talking about paleo-climate data from 600 million years ago. Hard to comprehend someone who has the WRITING SKILLS OF A CABBAGE. No, scratch that, cabbages are far more accomplished writers than you would ever be. Now go hang with your fellow cultists.
It is unproven. Though I will accept the basic proposition that the positive feedback loop is essential for switching the climate-systems between ice-ages and interglacials, however, while positive feedbacks may predominate during the transitions between relatively stable glacial and interglacial periods, negative feedbacks are likely to predominate within those periods. At present the earth is going through an interglacial period during which we can expect negative feedbacks to predominate.
@CHIPSTERO7 "It is unproven". Typical strawman argument, very little-if anything-in science is actually PROVEN, that's why we call them THEORIES. Still, the theories that stick (like evolution, gravity, relativity & AGW) are those which are best supported by all the available evidence. As I've said, I'm keenly waiting for the contrarians to provide a better theory which fits in with all the evidence, but I've noticed that they'd rather engage in crude political attacks instead.
@CHIPSTERO7 The peak of this interglacial was reached roughly 10,000 years ago-with the Holocene Optimum. Since then, the climate has been relatively stable-influenced by relatively slow changes in sunspots, volcanic activity & changes to thermo-haline circulation (or a mixture of them). The next big downward trend isn't due for several *thousand* years, but we are currently being dominated by negative natural feedbacks (PDO & Sunspots) yet still our planet is warming.
@CHIPSTERO7 So, no doubt you believe the fact that temperatures have risen 0.5 degrees in 30 years-in the absence of any proven *natural* cause-at the same time as the biggest rise in CO2 emissions in 70 million years is also *JUST A COINCIDENCE*? Sheesh, you're REALLY clutching at straws now.
@CHIPSTERO7 I'm not just "cherry picking"-the paleo-data shows clearly that each climate change event (Ordovician, Carboniferous & Tertiary) were preceded by a drop in atmospheric CO2. During the Quaternary Era, each Interglacial was started by a rise in incident solar radiation, but temperatures continued to rise *long* after solar radiation had peaked-but whilst CO2 levels were still approaching their zenith-just another coincidence? I'm suprised you still have any straws left to clutch!
@CHIPSTERO7 Well, if you're going to outright lie, then there really is no point even *trying* to debate the issue. According to all the data I've seen, Total Solar irradiance has been trending downwards for the last 30 years-at a rate of 0.02 Watts/Square meter. Sunspot numbers have also been trending downwards-culminating in lows unseen since the 19th century. Again, you really ought to try & keep up.
@CHIPSTERO7 Funny, though, Lindzen accepts the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming (i.e., that CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels will lead to a warmer planet) he simply claims that negative forcings (clouds) will prevent a significant increase in global temps over the next century. Unfortunately, his claims have not been backed up by the incoming evidence-all of which shows changes to cloud cover having a net *positive* forcing.
@MrHcks091 How much warming does Lindzen predict on a doubling of atmospheric CO2 from the pre-industrial baseline? I think Lindzen accepts the possibility that CO2 may have a minor warming effect, but he understands that constant increments of radiative forcing should produce progressively decreasing increments of global temperature due to Beer-Lambert law. So, while CO2 may warm us, the CO2 we are adding now is becoming increasingly inconsequential. As for clouds being a net-positive feedback?
@MrHicks091 My message to you and all your kind is this: stop mindlessly calling us "deniers" without justification and examine your own denialism and find out what has caused you to reject the scientific method that we sceptics are doing our best to practice and which you accuse us of not practicing whilst making no attempt to practice it yourselves. When you have embraced the scientific method and stopped parroting fashionable CAGW- ad hominems then we will be able to discuss the science.
@CHIPSTERO7 Oh I do love how the most abusive posters here are the quickest to get all upset about abuse when the argument turns against them. I've yet to see anything approaching good scientific method from you & your kind-just the same old, easily debunked Zombie Memes-mindlessly repeated-with a large dose of ludicrous conspiracy theories thrown in to boot. AGW is backed up by DECADES of Peer reviewed science, yet the contrarian view has little or nothing to back it up.
@MrHicks091 Righto. But how much infrared is CO2 capable of absorbing? IR spectroscopy which is used to determine the absorption characteristics of gases shows that CO2 can only absorb at the very most 8% of all infrared. The IPCC flatly assert that CO2 captures heat according to the logarithmic equation RF = ln(C/C0), but they never explain the physics that they claim it is based on. Apparently it is simply an article of warmist faith that they want us to accept on blind trust just as they do.
@CHIPSTERO7 If all you claimed were true, then why does CO2 account for around 20% of the *natural* Greenhouse Effect-even though its present at about 1% of the concentration of Water Vapor? Why is it that temperatures were 6 degrees warmer around 500 million years ago-even though the sun was 30% cooler than today? Why has the planet's temperature increased by 0.5 degrees in 30 years, when total solar irradiance has been trending downwards? Come on, do tell.
@MrTr0llol Its really quite simple, the Earth got closer to the sun, which meant more solar radiation, which meant the Earth Heated Up. This initial heating then drove CO2 into the atmosphere, which caused the planet to heat up even more. This time, though, its HUMANS pumping CO2 into the atmosphere-causing warming in the *absence* of increased solar radiation. I suggest its YOU who needs to open a Science Book sometime-assuming you can even READ!
@MrTr0llol Wow, exactly the kind of come-back I'd expect from a Denialist MORON like yourself. No facts to back your claim-just name calling & sulkiness when proven wrong. CO2 is relevent in global warming because the C-O bonds absorb & re-emit long-wave Infrared radiation. That is a proven *FACT* of physics, but you obviously don't know it because they conceal knowledge like that in BOOKS-a difficult situation for an illiterate person such as yourself.
@MrTr0llol That is, of course, why I'm not going to bother telling you to look yourself up under Idiot-because you'd have to be able to read. As I doubt you can read much beyond toddler level, there doesn't seem much point.
Thankfully the intelligentsia have rejected CAGW as demonstrated in most polls, the only people who still cling onto the fantasy that a trace gas which (accounts for 0.038% of the atmosphere) is a powerful driver of global temperatures are intellectually-challenged, scientifically-illiterate, plebeian-rodent-brained, slack-jawed cretins that we must never allow to procreate in case they taint future generations with their incomprehensible stupidity and impede the evolution of the human-race.
@CHIPSTERO7 Please do tell us who these "Intelligentsia" are who reject CAGW? You mean the morons that tell you WHAT to BELIEVE on Fox News? Or maybe those CEO's who run Exxon-Mobil, Shell or the West Virginia Coal Industry? They're the ones trying to impede the evolution of the human-race, by keeping us dependent on 19th century combustion technology. Just as well they have loads of sheeple like you-with *NO* knowledge whatsoever-to follow their lead.
@MrHicks091 Oh no. Another brainwashed sucker who has swallowed the alarmist twaddle emanating from the core-cabal of the CAGW-cult and who doesn't even know that he's been had!
@CHIPSTERO7 The only brainwashed sucker here is you mate. I know enough about *SCIENCE* to know that pumping billions of tonnes of CO2 per year into our atmosphere is NOT GOOD. Meanwhile, you & your fellow Denialist Cult members continue to listen to the lies spread by the Fossil Fuel Industry. Next you'll be swallowing the Kool-Aid they offer you, won't you? Just like a good, brainless cult member.
@MrHicks091 On the contrary, we should expect increased CO2 levels to enhance the net-productivity of the biosphere by providing vital nutrition to green plants and microorganisms and not lead to any increase in the global mean temperature whatsoever because CO2 is an insignificant greenhouse gas that exists in exceptionally small concentrations and absorbs infrared over only three very narrow frequencies. The thermal characteristics show that the CO2 is not capable of producing any warming.
@CHIPSTERO7 Oh dear, that old chestnut again. Even under ideal conditions (unlimited moisture & nitrogen), plant biomass is shown to only increase 20% if you *double* atmospheric CO2 (to around 600ppm), & then only for a few short years before acclimation sets in. In the real world, any benefit of increased CO2 is offset by-on land-water stress &-in the oceans-by increased acidification of the water. Time to check your facts again buddy.
@CHIPSTERO7 Also, you never answered the question-who are all these so-called "Intelligentsia" who don't believe that CAGW is going to happen? Seriously, name just ONE.
Over 80% of the price of a Litre of Diesel / Petrol is TAX in the UK this is what your government make off the evil oil corporations, what are the motives for pushing fuel prices through the roof ? to save the planet or to make a killing off the taxpayer.
So for a Litre of fuel at average pump price £1.26 the Government cream off £1.08 leaving the greedy oil Co to the 18 penny 'profit' to drill, refine, distibute and retail greedy sods these Big Oil leeches :o)
@PrairleDogged I see you're telling lies again-that's a bad habit of yours, isn't it? Actually the Oil Companies take away about 50p from the amount you mention, much more than the 18p you claim. Of course, a lot of the tax charged by the Government, on petrol, is to cover the the large costs of road usage-or do you expect people who *don't* drive to subsidize morons like you?
This fuel escalator forced prices up from one of the lowest in Europe to now one of the most expensive. When it was first added, fuel prices rose by 3 pence a litre and tax contributed to 72.8% of the total cost. By 1997 the escalator had added 11.1p to the cost of unleaded petrol and was at 75%. the escalator increased and 3 pence was added per litre. This took tax up to an incredible 81.5% of the total price of fuel.
Out of 1 pound, 26 pence, the fuel industry collects a total of 47 pence. Given that the the Fuel Industry are not required to meet the many & varied costs of maintaining a complex road transport network, I think that this is more than a fair price for them to receive-its certainly more than the 18 pence you claim.
This has been flagged as spam show
More evidence/impacts of climate change series..
(Please read article before the denier with all the sock puppet accounts censors it)..
.
Climate change: Our real bequest to future generations
.
Deficit hawks try to scare us about the debt we're leaving. That's economic nonsense -- unlike the costs of global warming.
.
London Guardian, United Kingdom
Opinion, 3 January 2012
Nightversionn 3 weeks ago
Evidence/impacts of climate change series...(read it before the denier censors it)..
.
Weather changes can affect maple sap production
.
A 2010 report from the U.S. Forest Service and Cornell University showed climate changes already have affected sugar maple trees in the northeastern U.S.
.
Kenosha News, Wisconsin
31 Dec 2011
Nightversionn 4 weeks ago
Evidence/impacts of climate change series...(read it before the denier censors it)..
.
How a geographer and a locust expert mapped a path for China's climate efforts
.
What started out as a temporary assignment to the United Nations, according to Niu Wenyuan, a geographer, became his never-ending mission to promote a green growth path for China.
.
ClimateWire
21 Dec 2011
Nightversionn 1 month ago
"Global Warming: Point of No Return" again all-ready ? din't we get this 10 year's ago, and 10 year's before that ? how time fly's
RevDevilin 1 month ago
More evidence/impacts of climate change series...(please read article before the denier with all the sock puppet accounts censors it)..
.
EU lawmakers back plan to withhold EU CO2 permits
.
European Union lawmakers backed a proposal on Tuesday to allow the EU Commission to prop up record low carbon prices by withholding 1.4 billion permits from the third phase of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, sending prices 20 percent higher.
.
Reuters
21 Dec 2011
Nightversionn 1 month ago
"1.4 billion permits from the third phase of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, sending prices 20 percent higher."
Yep..
Since everything depends on oil and coal they are only raisig the cost of living and doing business...which in turrn makespeople spend less and in turn causes slower business in turn causes lay offs, which in turn lower tax revenues..cause closed businesses and fired people cant pay taxes
This is gonna cause a deep recession there if it doesn't crash their Economy outright
TheRealArchAngel 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evidence / impacts of climate change series...(read it before the denier with all the sock puppet channels tries to censor it)..
.
As temperatures rise, so do fears of extreme weather
.
It’s mid-December, Christmas just a little more than a week away, but you wouldn’t have been able to guess that Thursday by looking at the weather in Toronto, where the temperature soared to a balmy, but wet 14 degrees.
.
Toronto Globe and Mail, Ontario
16 December 2011
Nightversionn 1 month ago
More climate news...(the denier troll with all the sock puppet channels will try to censor)..
.
Climate change means more Snowtobers
.
New Jersey residents who were slammed by Snowtober, including those still without power, should remember this misery the next time they hear a Republican presidential candidate – or any science-denying elected official – call climate change “a sham.”
.
Newark Star-Ledger, New Jersey
Editorial, 3 November 2011
Nightversionn 1 month ago
Comment removed
Nightversionn 1 month ago
The extinction rate is naturally about 40 species A DAY anyway Which comes over that 1 millions species gone "by 2050".....so proving it's from a lack of taxes and getting US to give 100 billion a year to UN to redistribute to countries "effected by Climate Change" is ,ah, difficult to say the least
Besides the AGW prediction.that CO2 can lead tempature rise(though it has never historically happened..ever) means we be extinct when +6 tempature matches 323ppm CO2 and long gone wentemp match 390
TheRealArchAngel 1 month ago
@TheRealArchAngel A little more time reading the scientific literature for you so that you aren't creating strawmen or speaking from a position of ignorance.
uknowispeaksense 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"A little more time reading the scientific literature for you so that you aren't creating strawmen "'
Strawmen?
he IPCC prediction is specifically that human caused rise in C/O2 can lead tepature when no where in the Historical record it has it ever happened
Al Gores chart of corrolating CO2 spike to tempature and saying the spike in co2 "is sure to cause a rise when more heat is added to the system" is the "AGW hypothises" IPCC presents
TheRealArchAngel 1 month ago
"or speaking from a position of ignorance"
Hey, my Associates in Science can get me a real job in the real real world actually fixing or repairing things while all those 3rd string "Scientists" with thier PHDs in Physics,Mathamatics,or Fluid Dynamics can only teach it, study it on grant,and/or vvolunteer thier time to IPCC cause their only practical skill be flipping burgers at Mc Donalds..lol
the 25 million dollar glorified "Sim Earth" still will give crap out if you put crap in
TheRealArchAngel 1 month ago
@TheRealArchAngel "will give crap out if you put crap in" is pretty much what happens to scienice illiterates when they source information from denier blogs and then post on YouTube. Why don't you read these IPCC reports in their entirety instead of parroting blogs. My understanding from reading hundreds of peer reviewed papers is that CO2 is a forcing agent, that amplifies warming, not the cause. Thats the strawman pushed by people too lazy to read for themselves.
uknowispeaksense 1 month ago
Fundmental flaw with AGWers claiming that "AGW" is happening is the Sun has been in extended minimus for the last decade
the "AGW hypothises" requires that the sun go into maximus and adds heat to the systemthat then can be asorbed by the extra CO2
The added CO2 aove 282ppm cannot asorb more heat from the same amount of heat
The "human added" must wait for thier to be more heat to asorb..only then is that heat "human caused"
The sun is only now coming out of minimus
TheRealArchAngel 1 month ago
@TheRealArchAngel so how do you explain the warming over the past 50 years which on average has risen over periods of solar maxima and minima. Also, how many w/m^2 on average difference is reaching the earth between solar maxima and minima?
uknowispeaksense 1 month ago
"how do you explain the warming over the past 50 years which on average has risen over periods of solar maxima and minima"
You mean Phil Jones supposed 1 degree?
It is more likely extreme "climate variability" from Earth heat distribution system variance/irregularity
And since the sun been stuck in solar minimus all this timr "Kosher AGW"..that rise in CO2 levels will asorb the extra heat from sun as Sun heats up and releases more heat hasn't applied yet
CO2 cant asorb more heat then there
TheRealArchAngel 1 month ago
@TheRealArchAngel Ow, my head hurts......not from the complexity of your explanation. Face palming really hurts.
uknowispeaksense 1 month ago
"Face palming really hurts."
Especially when you accidently hit your nose instead of your forhead(did that before)
TheRealArchAngel 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evidence/impacts of climate change series:
.
Water shortages and rising seas forecast to sweep UK by 2100
.
A quarter of the UK population could suffer more water shortages by the end of the century without urgent action to tackle climate change, the Met Office has warned. An extra 160,000 people across the UK could be put at risk of coastal flooding due to rising sea levels, the Met warned.
.
Edinburgh Scotsman, United Kingdom
6 December 2011
Nightversionn 1 month ago
Soon as I saw this I thought another "We're all gonna die" fear monger.Then I remember threy usually have a unterior motive so looked up his bio and Suprise suprise - he has 10 books for sale.
The real problem is flying elves (alarm)
we must act now (fear)
before its too late (urgency)
because if you don't there will be huge problems and we all could die (doom and gloom)
buy my book and see for yourself charts and graphs by top scientests
auntieSpam 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Numerous posts on where is the credible proof to explain climate variation?
Well there is such proof but no one wants to listen. The results demonstrate an unassailable correlation with historic climate data and because the data can be calculated, the future climate patterns can also be calculated, a forecast for the next two decades is shown and we are in for a long cold spell in the Northern hemisphere.
Google Solarchords and see for yourself.
howardsway782 2 months ago
Too little too late...
christmaspoo911 2 months ago
global warming what a load of bollocks......yes it's getting warm and what's causing it?......any why is this fucking music so annoying!!!! put some Led Zeppelin and we can all warm up happy!:)
gordon7443 3 months ago
@gordon7443 "global warming what a load of bollocks......yes it's getting warm and what's causing it?"
so which is it? I mean you have sort of contradicted yourself here. If you're trying to say that the climate is warming but that it isn't because of human activity, what is causing it?
uknowispeaksense 1 month ago
Yet more deep-sea hydrothermal vents on the iceagenowdot com site.
Pumping superheated water into the depths and belching out those co 2 bubbles.
Quote by Jim Sibbison, environmental journalist, former public relations official for the Environmental Protection Agency: "We routinely wrote scare stories...Our press reports were more or less true...We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment."
Now would this video be an example of this quote?
muttkat 4 months ago
Try my channel for 2011 real climate science conference,It's called 6th International conference on climate change held in The US.Scroll down the uploads column,they are in no particular order however the Q&A videos should be watched after the others and do read my description of the video.Enjoy
2wheels88 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evidence / impacts of climate change series…
.
Health impacts of climate change
.
Some people may reject the idea of climate change, but scientists say summer temperatures have been climbing over the years, and it will continue to get hotter over time.
It's these kinds of heat conditions that put many people at risk.
.
Puget Sound KUOW Public Radio Washington
9 August 2011
Nightversionn 5 months ago
Wiki - Calder is a long-standing sceptic of global warming. As early as 1980, he predicted that within 20 years "the much-advertised heating of the earth by the man-made carbon-dioxide ‘greenhouse’ [will fail] to occur; instead, there [will be] renewed concern about cooling and an impending ice age". Calder participated in the polemic film The Great Global Warming Swindle.
n5ifi 5 months ago
Oh yeah, The politicians and moneymakers are surfing that wave BIGTIME, help us prevent, buy that vote this. No thanks!
ravenwolfs 5 months ago
Global warming is only manmade in media. The rest Mother Nature doin herself.
She's the boss.
ravenwolfs 5 months ago
This has, since 2006, been proven to be as much of a hoax as the original theory
jdougswallow 7 months ago
watch?v=w-PI2vCA9ck
Nightverslonn 7 months ago
Comment removed
JoeJohn90 7 months ago
new report---42 MILLION DISPLACED BY NATURAL DISASTERS
Experts: Total More Than Doubles Previous Year's Estimate.. Climate Change Feared
XxBATMAN27xX 7 months ago
42 MILLION DISPLACED BY NATURAL DISASTERS
Experts: Total More Than Doubles Previous Year's Estimate.. Climate Change Feared
\
XxBATMAN27xX 7 months ago
And all that crap about cars and Co2 etc, the natural swamps alone produces waaaaay more GAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSS than that, but let the politicians surfe the global warming wave, poor bastards, they do everything to shine a little bit while the corpse is still warm, just like the journalists.
ravenwolfs 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Anyone who thinks that any evidence is conclusive,
Anyone who thinks that others are stupid for having differing views,
Anyone who thinks that they can't be wrong about global warming,
Anyone who rules things out based on previous knowledge,
Anyone who thinks they can be so sure on anything,
Anyone who thinks there are "experts" have to be telling the truth,
Anyone one who does not see the how futile hatred is,
Anyone who thinks any one source of info has all the right answers,
U R WRONG
Bullpuma 8 months ago
Conspicuously absent in this debate is the Piri Reis map which was created hundreds of years ago portraying Antarctica as ice free. Interesting. The map is now held in a vault in Washington DC. Where does that map place all these global warming theories?
Pavor4u 9 months ago
Pavor
That map shows Terra Australis, a non-existent massive Southern continent. Gough Island, Tierra Del Fuego, and other small islands were believed to be part of this continent. Terra Australis would be over 3x the size of Antarctica. Getting the Coastlines of Antarctica and Terra Australis to match up involves rotating the latter 70 degrees on its pole.
Archy
Thursday July 23, 2009
The Intellectual Dishonesty of Alan Quist
John McKay
Rovinpiper 7 months ago
Global Warming... I bet this count more than a cow farts... try search:
How many nuclear tests have been done ಠ_ಠ
ravenwolfs 9 months ago
@ravenwolfs nuclear testing has been banned , what, 10 yrs now? more?
Nightverslonn 8 months ago
@Nightverslonn
So??? My point is, the tests have been done, and alot, and if im not wrong radiation dont dissapear in ten years right?
ravenwolfs 8 months ago
watch?v=kVK8YPlxTCQ&feature=related
Nightverslonn 9 months ago
Technology got is into this mess.... technology is the only thing that will get us out. Oh and social change... many will die, most. Don't be sad, be happy we even got to this point. The odds of life and the odds of intelligent life should have NEVER happened.. but it did. This is the gift and it was given. Think solar power, domes and social change.
freeadplanet 10 months ago
@freeadplanet i know that Solar Power isn't so great. It is, from what I hear very high ion radiation. I misplaced the book I read it in, but I read once that there a Solar Powered home in Maine, that was so tightly sealed, at least that's what I remember it said. It said the home was very high in Radiation, living there was like having, I beleive itv said, like having 50 Chest XRAYS a day----The book was by 2 scientists, I beleive there names were Sandy Shaw and a guy , last name Pearson.
Peggycass 5 months ago
The climate controls us not the other way round. The environment allows us to live . We survive due to a hospitable climate and environment which nature can change in the blink of an eye. Please have some humility.
david222444 10 months ago
@david222444
Couldnt agree more, we humans can mess up the nature, but we can not fix it, the human nature is oooh we need to control this... well Moder Nature is in charge, so we got to suck it up, and the future generations need to be able to adapt to the changes. They cant control it. We cant. Well that aint if youre Harry Potter or a bunch of Jedi's.
ravenwolfs 8 months ago
@ravenwolfs Yes adaptation not alteration. The recent eruption in Iceland along with the cold oceans almost guarentees a cold winter for the northern hemisphere, we can do nothing but adapt.
david222444 8 months ago
i feel theat a lock of Global warming is inevitable. i received an E-Mail recently from a friend. it was a scientist who said after, i believe it was a recent earthquake, put so much, i believe he said C02 into the atmosphere, that it negated ALL THE EFFORTS PEOPLE MADE, i believe he said the last 5 years. so, some of it is inevitable. And from what i hear METHANE gas is a big cause of global warming. so people should probably buy BEANO, I've heard it works.
Peggycass 6 months ago
@And also, the people who are the biggest complainers, will they do their part/? Eat foods that aren't so gassy-- And if they feel gassy--- TRY BEANO, OR GET A CORK AND SHUT UP
Peggycass 6 months ago
@Peggycass I am actually repying to my own message. I believe it was a Volcano erupting that caused the problem.
Peggycass 5 months ago
@xWakizashi you are right when you say we are doomed. and you are right again when you say we have the hability now to change everything, but it won`t happen. we will die, because our leaders will never be able to face the truth in time. we need to stop burning fossil fuels now, but they can think only about money. do you think we are ready to change? we will vanish from existence, there will be no more human beings ever....
viagemixtlan 10 months ago
@viagemixtlan it sounds like you are probably a GORE fan. i heard yesterday from a friend that Al gore recently made a speech, ranting and raving and swearing. What a jerk. he has the right to his opinions, and the right to voice them, but people need to criticize him. he has no right to ranr, rave and swear. i don't beleive global warming is as bad as people say, he has the right to speak, yet as far as I'm concerned he HURTS the cause of global warming. He makes it into a joke.
Peggycass 5 months ago
@Also, you may not be a GORE fan. just because you believe in Global Warming, doesn'tnecessarily mean that you support him. But if you are a fan of his, or were, find sometbody else to idolize. he's IN MY OPINION ONLY, CRAZY. i read somewhere, can't remember where i read it, that he needs to get back on his medication. He probably wasn't or isn't on it, my opinion only he needs to be seen and treated.
Peggycass 5 months ago
This makes me want to cry.
megavlad888 10 months ago
@megavlad888 Better be careful, don't cry too much. Next thing we'll be hearing is that CRYING leads to Global Warming. And the sad part?A bunch of idiots will beleive it
Peggycass 5 months ago
Science news..
.
Arctic exploration for climate science
.
The Arctic is a harsh environment and it is difficult for scientists to get out there and study it in-person. But some of this on-the-ground data is exactly what climate scientists need in order to get a more complete picture of how the Arctic is changing.
.
Climate Central
17 March 2011
Nightversionn 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nightversionn You are so right comrade, teabaggers are racist nazis and are holocaust deniers as well as global warming deniers. Once we can curb the fascist US emissions, global warming will stop. China is leading the way in the green revolution and the fascists lie and say china is the leading polluter, which is just more teabagging racist lies. China is paving the way leading to a clean and renewable future. Keep up the great work comrade
JoeJohn90 7 months ago
@Nightversionn From what I've understood is change has been going on sincde???? Ever hear of Continental Drift? I know it's just a theory, but I believe it's true. And ever hear of PANGEA? Now that's CHANGE, I know it's a theory, but change is inevitable
Peggycass 5 months ago
The Dare Island Enigma is a novel concerning the Gaia Hypothesis see video book trailer
dltanner99 1 year ago
The dumbfucks are the ones that listen to anything global warming scientist say. That was the point dumbfuck. These guys have never been right about any prediction they have made.
n5ifi 1 year ago
@n5ifi You could do a more precise job by walking outside wet your finger and sticking it up in the air. The earth is what 4.5 billion years old and you idiots think you can make a prediction about what's happening looking at 30,50 or even a 100 years of that timespan. I've heard this peer review shit until I want to puck. They could a better job by peering up someone ass.
n5ifi 1 year ago
@i don't believe it's that old, but if it is, i'd say it's IN GREAT SHAPE for being 4.5 billion years
Peggycass 6 months ago
Global warming is killing the midwest right now. There are piles and piles almost 3 feet of global warming all over the midwest. The temperature has sky rocketed to 11 degrees. There is NO way the Earth can stand this heat. I seen cars in ditches everywhere due to global warming. If this continues? The temperature could go as high as 3 to 4 below. God save us from global warming.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@maybe I'm dumb, when you say 3 to 4 below, you are refering to Celsius? or if it is 3-4 fahrenheit, that is COLD. I can't remember how to convert fahrenheit to Celsius, or Vice versa.
Peggycass 6 months ago
@Peggycass My post was to be silly to point out the ludicrousness of the whole global warming thing..
SuperGuitarman69 5 months ago
@thanks, i also afree that's it's not as bad as people say it is. i have heard that it's from Co2, but from what I've heard, if global warming is true, some of it is inevitable.
Peggycass 5 months ago
C02 never has, and never will be a pollutant. One volcano eruption is the equivalent of 100 years of man made C02... It is a scam, and it always will be... Wake up people.. If anyone tells you they believe that man is causing the earth to be on a irreversible course of destruction because of our C02 emissions? Don't believe a word of it and tell them to seek help.. Unless they are in on the scam,, in that case? Kick them in the ball sack.
SuperGuitarman69 5 months ago
@have you heard the saying TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING/ Too much C02 probably isn't good, like too much Fat Soluble vitamins can do real harm. Taken the way you are supposed to , yes, good. i knew a woman that overdosed on Fat Soluble vitamins was very ill, never really recovered, never regained her heath. So too much CO2 could probably kill. but i don't think that's happening. . Also with patients who are on Oxygen, turn it up, esp. people with emphysema, bye bye, not good
Peggycass 5 months ago
@Peggycass i worded myself wrong. i said i don't know how much Oxygen there is supposed to be in the air, I meant the ratio of oxygen with Co2, etc, but as good as it is for us, if C02 suddenly jumped to 10 times the amount it's supposed to be, not good.. it , i am sure could do real harm.
Peggycass 5 months ago
so, yes i agree with you to a pont. co2 goes into the air, i am sure it's not going to hurt. Yet, if it wasn't regulated, or wasn't able to regulate itself,. i feel it could do harm. i cant remember how much oxygen there is supposed to be in the atmosphere, yet if it didn't regulate itself, i think it could be lethal
Peggycass 5 months ago
@Peggycass Okay let's use some logic here.. Let's say that you have a stadium full of people.. Every person in the stadium represents a portion of the atmosphere.. Let's say there is 5000 people in the stadium... On the home team they are wearing the color blue.. The away team is wearing red.. Out of 5000 people the home team has 4996 people and the away team has 4 people. Do you think that the away team can be spotted at a glance? That is how much C02 makes up our atmosphere. Get it?
SuperGuitarman69 5 months ago
@SuperGuitarman69 thanks for your education, i did chack on the ratio of Co2 in the atmosphere. in the air we breathe 78% is Nitrogen 21% O2. and 0.35% is Co2. So, using your example of 5000 people, or 5000 particl 0.3% is Co2, 0.3% of 5000 I figure is 15 , not 4, but still not a large amount. I still stand by the fact gthat TOO MUCH of a good thing isn't good. I also don't worry about Global Warming like some do. Some is inevitable, thanks
Peggycass 5 months ago
Please note, in the beginning of my note, I wrote that 0.35% is co2, i meant 0.3%. Still not much. i feel that a lot of Global warming is inevitable. Too bad that the people who go on and on about how bad it is--when you present them with the opposite, gthey don't want to hear it. You'd think they's be happy hearing that it's not as bad as they thought, but no, it's like they want it to be true, too bad
Peggycass 5 months ago
@Peggycass You need to look up the UN's Agenda 21.... It will explain a lot about why there is this BS about global warming, cooling whatever they are calling it now.
SuperGuitarman69 5 months ago
@SuperGuitarman69 thanks. i will. i do agree that it is a bunch of BS. I think people may contribute some, but very little. i also wrote today to someone else that i heard that Gore brecently gave a speech, ranting, raving and swearing. What a jerk i also read somewhere that he needs to get back on his medication, HA HA
Peggycass 5 months ago
Doomsdayers have always been wrong? Noah was crazy for building the boat, right?So the great and dreadfull day of the Lord wil not be great for some people?I know there is global warming, wars and rumors of wars, and great wickedness upon the earth but still know the return of the Lord can be a great day if we prepare and live correctly.
MrFitzwilly 1 year ago
@MrFitzwilly If GOD told me to build a boat, I would build. AL GORE.......not so much.
n5ifi 1 year ago
@from what i heard, GLOBAL WARMING started right after noahs flood. Anyone else hear that?
Peggycass 6 months ago
So the glaciers really are not melting? Please treat us like adults and leave out the idiotic kiddi statements. This is a problem and ignoring it will not reduce its significance. And no we are not returning all to the same place. Are we all doing the same works? Are we all striving to keep the commandments? And on top of that do we all have the same knowledge of truth? of course not.
MrFitzwilly 1 year ago
@i'm a kid of the fifties. i have heard that the glaciers were melting way back then. i am curious, what do you think would happen if the ice in the Polar regions all melted/ do you think it would flood the entire earth? I it wouldn't. As i said, they have been melting since the fifties, 1950's and probably further back. a lot of it is inevitable.
Peggycass 5 months ago
remember kiddies CO2 is GOOD for you, we need MORE CO2, we need to warm this planet UP, Stupid Scientist Propaganda, Funny Video Though, Thumbs DOWN
sumstuff46 1 year ago
@sumstuff46 i hope they don't swarm it too much. in the summer where I live, it's so hot and humid. I have asthma, and humidity, heat is hard on me, so BRING ON THE COLD. At least at night so I can sleep. Really hard to sleep when it's hot and humid. I can't have Air Conditioning in my windows, not the right kind of windows. So BRING ON THE COLD, and the sooner the better
Peggycass 5 months ago
The natural cycles have changed sit back and enjoy the cooling. I bet you wish for warming in 10 years!
david222444 1 year ago
Al Gore and Cohorts are laughing their asses off making millions and billions off of stupid people (with and without PhDs, Masters etc.) and enjoying a life with nice homes on beaches, with heated pools, Learjets and classy parties.
manoman0 1 year ago
@manoman0 yeah, what hypocrites. Laughing all the way to the bank
Peggycass 5 months ago
@Peggycass Well, that's one thing, worse is, that people actually believe Al Gore and Cohort.
manoman0 5 months ago
@i just posted something, Did you hear that Gore recently gave a speech, ranting , raving and sweraing. i haven't heard the speech yet, but it should be on You Tube. What a jerk
Peggycass 5 months ago
@Peggycass I mean, first, he was groomed to be a president; didn't work out, then he sets up a trade-fraud based on lies....and that's coming down too. So, guess he's really going nuts....lol..
manoman0 5 months ago
This Global Warming Crime act reminds me of Asterix and Obelix in some kind of trouble (which they always got into), quote: "They sky will fall down on our heads, by Teutates!"
manoman0 1 year ago
2:16 and what makes those "official scientific studies" trustworthy? If you accuse of Bush having fried the numbers,what would prevent me of believing you did the same thing?Who are you to clain yourself as an authority? What proves you have "only the best" at heart? Who do YOU get paid from? WHOSE interests are you defending? Cui bono? What's in for YOU? Political positions without being elected? Money? Influence? Fame? Awards? Status? Why would that not corrupt you as well as any other person?
manoman0 1 year ago
In 1970, when environmentalists were making predictions of man made global cooling and the threat of an ice age, what kind of government policy should we have undertaken to prevent such a calamity?
When Ehrlich predicted that England would not exist in the year 2000, what steps should the British Parliament have taken in 1970 to prevent such a dire outcome?
Finally, what makes us think that environmental alarmism is any more correct today than yesterday?
n5ifi 1 year ago
@n5ifi Also, according to global temperature records, the climate was cooling since 1940, then reversed it's trend begining in the mid-1970s. What the fuck do you expect scientists to say when the facts and data changes?
sarcee1960 1 year ago
@sarcee1960 They made assumptions using data over a 30 year timespan of a planet that is what a 4.5 billion years old?
I expect them to keep their incredibly stupid, unfounded, unscientific,NO VALID FUCKING DATA TO THEMSELVE. What a bunch of idiots.
n5ifi 1 year ago
@n5ifi They made projections based on man made aerosols which were increasing in the atmosphere. They saw trends and they pointed those trends out. That's what scientists do, dumbfuck. You want to gag those scientists too? Almost no one was predicting an impending ice age.In fact, there are only two references in peer reviewed journals from the 1970s that postulated global cooling leading to an ice age. Compare that to the number of peer reviewed scientists today who believe in global warming.
sarcee1960 1 year ago
At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind." C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said, "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed."
n5ifi 1 year ago
@n5ifi um...you might want to check your facts. Nigel Calder is an anti-environmentalist and a well-known climate denier, and has been predicting an ice age since 1969. He has been wrong all this time and pretty much about everything he's said.
sarcee1960 1 year ago
@n5ifi I'll have to check on this guy, Nigel Calder. I wonder if he was a friend of Ira Einhorn? he was a guy who killed his girlfriend, Holly Maddux, year? Don't know for sure. But Einhorn tried to take credit for the First Earth Day. i would find it interesting to see if they were friends---and if yes, i would really question the guy. just curious
Peggycass 5 months ago
@Peggycass Ira Einhorn is actually a nobody piece of crap liar. Ool worn out hippy that killed his girlfriend and then ran all over the world trying to keep from getting caught. He has no opinion as far as I'm concerned. Earth Day was actually started by Wisconsin idiot (image that) Sen. Gaylord Nelson.
n5ifi 5 months ago
@n5ifi I TOTALLY AREE WITH YOU. I never said he was a good guy, i read a book, THE UNICORN'S SECRET, about EINHORN. I just noticed that you brought up the name of Nigel Calder, happened to mention Earth day. I read that Einhorn tried to take credit for the First earth day, and he WASN'T the one who started it. He escaped to Europe. i can't believe there are people who still think he is innocent. Totally DELUDED people. Again, i was just curious whether Nigel Calder was a friend of Einhorn
Peggycass 5 months ago
In 1975, the Environmental Fund warned" The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000." Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind." That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned, that by 1995 "somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." Doomsayers have always been wrong.
n5ifi 1 year ago
We're all returning to the same place anyway no matter what we decide to do. I don't know what all the fuss is about. Death is not that bad, you'll see.
isocrate27 1 year ago
YOU FUCKING MORONS
HOW DID THE EARTH HEAT UP PAST THOSE OTHER ICE AGES.
OH YES THE SUV'S OUR ANCESTORS HAD.
DUMBFUCKS.
MrTr0llol 1 year ago
Mr.Hicks Sucks Dicks.
Blind Idiot.
MrTr0llol 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 Please try and keep up. I said there was a correlation in the rock-strata paleoclimate data between temperature and CO2 but only for a few fleeting million years, but when you look at the entire 600 million years, there is no relationship between CO2 and temperature. All you need to do is look at the link I provided to confirm this. As for ice-core data, there is a correlation going back 800,000 years, but the CO2-changes lag the temperature-changes, on average by 800 years.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 "As for ice-core data, there is a correlation going back 800,000 years, but the CO2-changes lag the temperature-changes, on average by 800 years." I never claimed otherwise but-like a true Contrarian-you have to put words in people's mouths to win the argument. I pointed out that-though warming was initially driven by increased insolation, the warming event persists for more than 1,000 years *after* insolation peaks. How did that happen-magic?
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 Sure, CO2 and temperature may have both been high during the Ordovician Glacial Period but the global climate system is extremely complex and is capable of existing in a multitude of different states as determined by the values of countless different parameters of which the global atmospheric CO2 concentration is but one. Taking a few instances of a CO2-increase coinciding with a global temperature-increase and claiming it proves CO2 causes global warming is silly to say the least.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
As for your comment about TSI decreasing at a rate of 0.02 Watts/Square meter for the last 30 years. Please present a source.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Hmmm, try the World Radiation Center in Davos, or the Joint Institute for the Study of Atmosphere & Ocean in Washington-or try SORCE as well. There are plenty of good references for solar radiation out there-assuming you're prepared to LOOK. Still, as you're not prepared to provide evidence to back your increasingly flimsy claims, then I *REALLY* don't see any further point "debating" with you-now go hang out with your fellow cultists & discuss the lastest "Evil Conspiracy".
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 This is the paleoclimate data from which you are ignominiously cherrypicking instances of high CO2 and high temperature coinciding: h ttp://csccc.fc pp.org/files/f13.jp g
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 We already know the contribution that CO2 has thanks to IR spectrometer experiments. We don't need unscrupulous scientists like Trenberth twisting the science to support his prejudices.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Oh how typical of the Contrarian Crowd-when Peer Reviewed Data doesn't fit with their own strongly held beliefs, they accuse-without PROOF-the scientists behind that data of "twisting the science". You want to provide EVIDENCE to back your claims, or are you just going to keep quoting Jo Nova at me?
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 When have I once quoted Jo Nova?
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Virtually every claim you've made can be found in Jo Nova's books. Still, maybe you're not quoting her, maybe its just the kind of GroupThink we've come to expect from you & your kind.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 The idea that clouds are a net-positive feedback is one that sounds absurd to me and I don't think all the evidence suggests it (Spencer 2008). The IPCC claim that as the world warms we get fewer clouds which pushes up temperature. If this were true though, then where do the negative feedbacks come from to counteract the overwhelming positive feedbacks to keep the temperature within narrow bounds? Surely, the positive feedbacks must be arrested at some point by negative feedbacks?
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 Does CO2 really account for 20% of all the greenhouse effect? According to who? I find this hard to believe considering the fact that water vapour is about one-hundred times more abundant than CO2 and whose greenhouse potency is over 20 times that of CO2 as well. And the temperature being 6C warmer 500 million years ago could have something to do with the enormous amount of volcanism leading to increased air-pressure. That is one possibility. And TSI has not decreased for 30 years.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Many scientists have shown-in lab studies-the relative contribution of various gases to the Greenhouse Effect-but the most recent was Kiehl & Trenberth. However, as you limit your reading to the mere smattering of Contrarians out there, I'm not suprised you don't know that. As to the planet 500 million years ago-that volcanism created CO2 levels of 2000ppm-3000ppm-which in turn led to the warmer climate-do please try & keep up, your ignorance is REALLY SHOWING!
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 If you say so Hicks.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 You might be interested to know that there is absolutely no correlation between CO2 and temperature going backs 500 million years. During the Ordovician period 450 million years ago the planet dropped into one of the worst ice-ages ever and CO2 levels were 5000pppm. We can both cherry-pick instances in the paleoclimatological data to support our assertions. And your claim that "CO2 levels of 2000ppm-3000ppm led to the warmer climate" is something you have yet to offer evidence for.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Prior to the Ordovician, CO2 levels in the amtosphere fell from roughly 7,000ppm to about 3,000ppm-followed by a drop in temperatures of around 22 degrees C to little more than 12 degrees C. During the Carboniferous Era, CO2 levels fell from around 3,000ppm to around 500ppm, & temperatures during that period fell from around 20 degrees C to around 14 degrees C. During the Tertiary Period, CO2 fell from 1,000ppm to 300ppm &-again-temps fell from 20 degrees C to around 14 degrees C.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks Again, cherry-picking instances when CO2 and temperature were both high does not prove anything. At best the paleoclimate data can give us only a correlation, which merely indicates the possibility of a cause but does not prove it. To assume a cause from a mere correlation is to jump to a conclusion and doing that is in conflict with rational science. A correlation cannot prove that CO2 causes temperature changes any more than it can prove that temperature changes cause changes to CO2.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Hilarious. So the fact that 3 of biggest shifts in climate were preceded by massive shifts in CO2 levels is just one huge *coincidence*? I guess the same is true of the warmings that occurred later in each era too? The fact is that you claimed that there's no CORRELATION between CO2 & temperature in the paleo-climate record, but you've now just admitted that I *have* a correlation-so you're contradicting yourself-the sign of someone with a very poorly constructed argument.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHic There is no correlation in rock-strata paleoclimate data going back 600 million years for which I have just provided you with a link. Looking at the graph now I can see that your assertion CO2 levels preceded the shifts in temperature is false. There may be a correlation for a short period of time, say, a few million years. Your argument that these shifts were caused by CO2 is unproven and the ice-core record unequivocally proves that temperature-changes precede corresponding CO2-changes.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Sorry, but last I checked there isn't any ice-core data stretching back half a billion years. You're probably incorrectly referring to the interglacial periods of the last half a million years-& I clearly stated that those were *started* by changes in solar radiation-but maintained by increases in CO2-as *any* paleo-climatologist worth their name will tell you-but which you REFUSE to believe 'cause it doesn't fit your Denialist Agenda.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 I never said there was ice-core data stretching back 500 million years ferrgoodnessake. You have the reading comprehension of a cabbage.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Just a moment ago, you were saying there *was* a correlation-make up your mind. There is studies showing more closely the link between CO2 & climate change (particularly the Ordovician Glacial Period) out there-like the work of Herrmann, Patzkowsky and Pollard, or Young et al. Anyway, like I said-bored of you now. Hopefully more open minded people will see how WEAK your entire argument is.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 " Your argument that these shifts were caused by CO2 is unproven and the ice-core record unequivocally proves that temperature-changes precede corresponding CO2-changes." That's what you said, after talking about paleo-climate data from 600 million years ago. Hard to comprehend someone who has the WRITING SKILLS OF A CABBAGE. No, scratch that, cabbages are far more accomplished writers than you would ever be. Now go hang with your fellow cultists.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
It is unproven. Though I will accept the basic proposition that the positive feedback loop is essential for switching the climate-systems between ice-ages and interglacials, however, while positive feedbacks may predominate during the transitions between relatively stable glacial and interglacial periods, negative feedbacks are likely to predominate within those periods. At present the earth is going through an interglacial period during which we can expect negative feedbacks to predominate.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 "It is unproven". Typical strawman argument, very little-if anything-in science is actually PROVEN, that's why we call them THEORIES. Still, the theories that stick (like evolution, gravity, relativity & AGW) are those which are best supported by all the available evidence. As I've said, I'm keenly waiting for the contrarians to provide a better theory which fits in with all the evidence, but I've noticed that they'd rather engage in crude political attacks instead.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 The peak of this interglacial was reached roughly 10,000 years ago-with the Holocene Optimum. Since then, the climate has been relatively stable-influenced by relatively slow changes in sunspots, volcanic activity & changes to thermo-haline circulation (or a mixture of them). The next big downward trend isn't due for several *thousand* years, but we are currently being dominated by negative natural feedbacks (PDO & Sunspots) yet still our planet is warming.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 So, no doubt you believe the fact that temperatures have risen 0.5 degrees in 30 years-in the absence of any proven *natural* cause-at the same time as the biggest rise in CO2 emissions in 70 million years is also *JUST A COINCIDENCE*? Sheesh, you're REALLY clutching at straws now.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 I'm not just "cherry picking"-the paleo-data shows clearly that each climate change event (Ordovician, Carboniferous & Tertiary) were preceded by a drop in atmospheric CO2. During the Quaternary Era, each Interglacial was started by a rise in incident solar radiation, but temperatures continued to rise *long* after solar radiation had peaked-but whilst CO2 levels were still approaching their zenith-just another coincidence? I'm suprised you still have any straws left to clutch!
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Well, if you're going to outright lie, then there really is no point even *trying* to debate the issue. According to all the data I've seen, Total Solar irradiance has been trending downwards for the last 30 years-at a rate of 0.02 Watts/Square meter. Sunspot numbers have also been trending downwards-culminating in lows unseen since the 19th century. Again, you really ought to try & keep up.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
The US government spent $79 billion on climate research and technology since
1989 3,500 times as much as anything offered to sceptics. It buys a bandwagon of
support, a repetitive rain of press releases, and includes PR departments of
institutions like NOAA, NASA, the Climate Change Science Program and the
Climate Change Technology Program. The $79 billion figure does not include
money from other western governments, private industry, & is not adjusted for
inflation
PrairleDogged 1 year ago
GISS manipulates climate data in Mackay (2nd Edition)
Google it to see the warming trend in it's full glory.
PrairleDogged 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 Just one, eh? Okay, Richard Lindzen.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Funny, though, Lindzen accepts the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming (i.e., that CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels will lead to a warmer planet) he simply claims that negative forcings (clouds) will prevent a significant increase in global temps over the next century. Unfortunately, his claims have not been backed up by the incoming evidence-all of which shows changes to cloud cover having a net *positive* forcing.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHcks091 How much warming does Lindzen predict on a doubling of atmospheric CO2 from the pre-industrial baseline? I think Lindzen accepts the possibility that CO2 may have a minor warming effect, but he understands that constant increments of radiative forcing should produce progressively decreasing increments of global temperature due to Beer-Lambert law. So, while CO2 may warm us, the CO2 we are adding now is becoming increasingly inconsequential. As for clouds being a net-positive feedback?
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 My message to you and all your kind is this: stop mindlessly calling us "deniers" without justification and examine your own denialism and find out what has caused you to reject the scientific method that we sceptics are doing our best to practice and which you accuse us of not practicing whilst making no attempt to practice it yourselves. When you have embraced the scientific method and stopped parroting fashionable CAGW- ad hominems then we will be able to discuss the science.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Oh I do love how the most abusive posters here are the quickest to get all upset about abuse when the argument turns against them. I've yet to see anything approaching good scientific method from you & your kind-just the same old, easily debunked Zombie Memes-mindlessly repeated-with a large dose of ludicrous conspiracy theories thrown in to boot. AGW is backed up by DECADES of Peer reviewed science, yet the contrarian view has little or nothing to back it up.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 Oh dear. Is this discussion getting too technical for you?
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 Righto. But how much infrared is CO2 capable of absorbing? IR spectroscopy which is used to determine the absorption characteristics of gases shows that CO2 can only absorb at the very most 8% of all infrared. The IPCC flatly assert that CO2 captures heat according to the logarithmic equation RF = ln(C/C0), but they never explain the physics that they claim it is based on. Apparently it is simply an article of warmist faith that they want us to accept on blind trust just as they do.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 If all you claimed were true, then why does CO2 account for around 20% of the *natural* Greenhouse Effect-even though its present at about 1% of the concentration of Water Vapor? Why is it that temperatures were 6 degrees warmer around 500 million years ago-even though the sun was 30% cooler than today? Why has the planet's temperature increased by 0.5 degrees in 30 years, when total solar irradiance has been trending downwards? Come on, do tell.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
Comment removed
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
It is a hoax... you just google shit and you thinks your right.
Go open a fucking science book and you will see we have had ice ages in the past.
HOW DID THE EARTH HEAT UP AGAIN?
oh right they drove around in SUVS thousands of years ago.
This is song is not Train- Calling All Angels.
It is Now We Are Free from the Gladiator Soundtrack by Hans Zimmer.
Suck one.
MrTr0llol 1 year ago
@MrTr0llol Its really quite simple, the Earth got closer to the sun, which meant more solar radiation, which meant the Earth Heated Up. This initial heating then drove CO2 into the atmosphere, which caused the planet to heat up even more. This time, though, its HUMANS pumping CO2 into the atmosphere-causing warming in the *absence* of increased solar radiation. I suggest its YOU who needs to open a Science Book sometime-assuming you can even READ!
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 Wow god damn you are dumb. CO2 isn't relevant to change to global warming. I'm not going to argue with an idiot...go look it up yourself.
MrTr0llol 1 year ago
@MrTr0llol Wow, exactly the kind of come-back I'd expect from a Denialist MORON like yourself. No facts to back your claim-just name calling & sulkiness when proven wrong. CO2 is relevent in global warming because the C-O bonds absorb & re-emit long-wave Infrared radiation. That is a proven *FACT* of physics, but you obviously don't know it because they conceal knowledge like that in BOOKS-a difficult situation for an illiterate person such as yourself.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrTr0llol That is, of course, why I'm not going to bother telling you to look yourself up under Idiot-because you'd have to be able to read. As I doubt you can read much beyond toddler level, there doesn't seem much point.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrTr0llol .....or lead the sheeps to their butchers. Oh, wait, the sheeps are willing to there by themselves!
manoman0 1 year ago
If anybody agrees with the logic of the comment below would you please take part in a small test that I've prepared in my lab.
1. Place a trace amount of the EBOLA VIRUS on a spoon and put it in your mouth.
2. Swallow the Ebola Virus.
3. Oops.
TheElasticJesus 1 year ago
@TheElasticJesus
Yes Oop's Mark you used that one nine months ago :o)
"MarkNobes (4 hours ago)
Anyone who thinks CO2 is minute should try this experiment
1 - Get some EBOLA VIRUS and swallow it.
2 - Seek expert advice.
Oops.
Yes Oop's Jesus Oop's indeed.
PrairleDogged 1 year ago
Thankfully the intelligentsia have rejected CAGW as demonstrated in most polls, the only people who still cling onto the fantasy that a trace gas which (accounts for 0.038% of the atmosphere) is a powerful driver of global temperatures are intellectually-challenged, scientifically-illiterate, plebeian-rodent-brained, slack-jawed cretins that we must never allow to procreate in case they taint future generations with their incomprehensible stupidity and impede the evolution of the human-race.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Please do tell us who these "Intelligentsia" are who reject CAGW? You mean the morons that tell you WHAT to BELIEVE on Fox News? Or maybe those CEO's who run Exxon-Mobil, Shell or the West Virginia Coal Industry? They're the ones trying to impede the evolution of the human-race, by keeping us dependent on 19th century combustion technology. Just as well they have loads of sheeple like you-with *NO* knowledge whatsoever-to follow their lead.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 Oh no. Another brainwashed sucker who has swallowed the alarmist twaddle emanating from the core-cabal of the CAGW-cult and who doesn't even know that he's been had!
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 The only brainwashed sucker here is you mate. I know enough about *SCIENCE* to know that pumping billions of tonnes of CO2 per year into our atmosphere is NOT GOOD. Meanwhile, you & your fellow Denialist Cult members continue to listen to the lies spread by the Fossil Fuel Industry. Next you'll be swallowing the Kool-Aid they offer you, won't you? Just like a good, brainless cult member.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 On the contrary, we should expect increased CO2 levels to enhance the net-productivity of the biosphere by providing vital nutrition to green plants and microorganisms and not lead to any increase in the global mean temperature whatsoever because CO2 is an insignificant greenhouse gas that exists in exceptionally small concentrations and absorbs infrared over only three very narrow frequencies. The thermal characteristics show that the CO2 is not capable of producing any warming.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Oh dear, that old chestnut again. Even under ideal conditions (unlimited moisture & nitrogen), plant biomass is shown to only increase 20% if you *double* atmospheric CO2 (to around 600ppm), & then only for a few short years before acclimation sets in. In the real world, any benefit of increased CO2 is offset by-on land-water stress &-in the oceans-by increased acidification of the water. Time to check your facts again buddy.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Oh &, btw, time to readjust that tin-foil hat of yours, I think its starting to cut off the circulation to your brain. Whoops, too late!
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@CHIPSTERO7 Also, you never answered the question-who are all these so-called "Intelligentsia" who don't believe that CAGW is going to happen? Seriously, name just ONE.
MrHicks091 1 year ago
WE DIDN'T LISTEN!!
jjjmethosjjj 1 year ago
Are any of these children taught how to research,there all copying and pasting,you are being dumbed down,
MsCookie1995 1 year ago
Global Warming is a lie. We have all been brainwashed.
mkl62 1 year ago
So who makes the dough?
Over 80% of the price of a Litre of Diesel / Petrol is TAX in the UK this is what your government make off the evil oil corporations, what are the motives for pushing fuel prices through the roof ? to save the planet or to make a killing off the taxpayer.
So for a Litre of fuel at average pump price £1.26 the Government cream off £1.08 leaving the greedy oil Co to the 18 penny 'profit' to drill, refine, distibute and retail greedy sods these Big Oil leeches :o)
PrairleDogged 1 year ago
@PrairleDogged I see you're telling lies again-that's a bad habit of yours, isn't it? Actually the Oil Companies take away about 50p from the amount you mention, much more than the 18p you claim. Of course, a lot of the tax charged by the Government, on petrol, is to cover the the large costs of road usage-or do you expect people who *don't* drive to subsidize morons like you?
MrHicks091 1 year ago
ww w. petrolprices . com/fuel-tax . html
Fuel Escalator Forces Prices Up
This fuel escalator forced prices up from one of the lowest in Europe to now one of the most expensive. When it was first added, fuel prices rose by 3 pence a litre and tax contributed to 72.8% of the total cost. By 1997 the escalator had added 11.1p to the cost of unleaded petrol and was at 75%. the escalator increased and 3 pence was added per litre. This took tax up to an incredible 81.5% of the total price of fuel.
PrairleDogged 1 year ago
@PrairleDogged I'll see you, & raise you
ww w.petrolprices . com/price-of-petrol.html
Out of 1 pound, 26 pence, the fuel industry collects a total of 47 pence. Given that the the Fuel Industry are not required to meet the many & varied costs of maintaining a complex road transport network, I think that this is more than a fair price for them to receive-its certainly more than the 18 pence you claim.
MrHicks091 1 year ago