It's the sun, stupid. Following the Medieval Warming Period (about the same temps as now), there were a number of solar minimums between 1250 and 1850 (Wolf, Sporer, Maunder & Dalton) that caused the Little Ice Age (LIA). Since the LIA, there haven't been ANY solar minimums, so global temps have risen naturally. The current solar max peaked in 1990 & we seem to be in a new solar minimum, which explains why no warming since 1998. CO2 had NOTHING to do with it. CAGW is dead; see Climategate 2.0
Its amazing what a little upper class English accent, a few past political credentials and a series of quote mines can do. And this man has the nerve to talk about what Al Gore is doing?
@123backinyerface: He is doing the EXACT same thing as Al Gore, that is the point. But Algore gets publicized far beyond this man b/c the interestest behind Algore fund him better. It is all the IPCC & politics behind this Chicken Little scare story.
in case anyone doesn't understand the deeper meaning of YooTubeCritc's message - the elite masters of the UN are lizard people from the center of the Earth.
fuck the UN and its elite masters.. the UN wants carbon taxes so they can fund thier one world new order.. every carbon tax suggested has a certain % promised to the UN. They want people to pay for their own slavery and you know what? A lot of fucking idiots will. Look up wiki leaks and climate gate if you want to see what the IPCC is all about.. Fuck em all
Anthropogenic Global Warming is caused by human increases in fossil fuel CO2 PPM from 300 PPM for the last 800,000 years at least to the industrial revolution, to 390 PPM now.
Furthermore, gasoline engines can't be much more efficient than they already are. It's about the delta K between the hot reservoir and the cold reservoir, and when you do the math, things look very grim. Sure, you can do things like pump exhaust gases back into engine and things like that, but the bottom line is that combustion is at 19th century technology, and we are in the 21st now.
Al Gore's climate scientists have found that CO2 emissions from the US are the sole cause for Global Warming and that carbon taxes implemented on the US, will stop Global Warming. China and India's CO2 emissions have nothing to do with it.
Just because you can't prove it's happening doesn't mean we should ignore all the chemicals we release into the environment, something bad will happen eventually.
Let no individualization of anything stymie the collectivists' corruptive talents in destroying all things that make the human experience worthwhile and progressive. We, who hoard, are light years behind those who stock-pile. We, who bathe, are uncomplicated and unfettered and unmarred and unobstructed in our minds and in our hearts and in Spirit and in conscience.
i detect doubt, why? the repubs say it is not happening, why play around? it isn't over what caused it, it is whether or not it is happening. when the repubs and/or dems figure out if it is happening, then figure out the caquse. it stands, the same, the repubs say it isn't happening and the dems are in the closet saying it is. who do you listen too?
@DamWarden Of course the cause of the warming matters! Please tell me I misunderstood your point? If the cause is not anthropogenic in nature then no amount of hobbiling our economy will change that. If the cause it not anthropogenic in nature then instead of focusing on ways in which to reverse the trend we shoul dbe focusing on dealing with the otherwise inevitable results. We absolutely need to know the cause of the warming if there is infact any warming at all.
Mummer Katharine Hepburn strove to destroy traditional Western values as she had promoted lesbianism (in the guise of women's liberation), the notion of sacred victims' group-rights (domestic violence and "hate"-crime laws), sustained development (population control, also known as eugenics) and infanticide (abortion)--all are the tenets of cultural Marxism. We must find someone more worthy of our selfless adoration. (British Petroleum has provided oil with a free trip to the beach!)
Plain Jane Goodall, Jacques Cousteau, Prince Phillip, Ted Turner, Obama, Julian & Aldous Huxley, Bertrand Russell, Margaret Sanger, Adolf Hitler, Herbert Geo. Wells, Paul Ehrlich {of "The Population Bomb"/"End of Affluence" infamy}, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Teddy Roosevelt & Pol Pot are unapologetic eugenicists. They preach "bio-ethics"; "animal rights" & "sustainability" which ALWAYS subjects the impoverished people of the Earth to forced sterilizations/abortions, vaccinations & "euthanasia."
@OneDollarBook How are the meds working? Your dosage seems to be slipping. I love it when people come out against eugenics. Of course you ignore the fact that this process takes place in just about every other species in the world but of course humans like to pretend they are not animals. Eugenics is nothing more than the attempt to improve humanity by preventing those with inheritable genetic malformities from reproducing. Seems like a good idea to me.
@captwasabi : Population control/reduction begins with you. I didn't pretend that YOU are not an animal. I believe that hunting season should be all about tracking and bagging you.
Al GORE-YOU are no Patriot, I heard you are a RAPIST! Your a Benedict Arnold to our Country-Anyone who receives a "Nobel Piece (of shet) Prize" is a TRADER (see Obama Kenyan Immigrant)to America. Listen to this Crap Head blame America-everyone in Bali cheers-Yea they blame all worlds problems on America, Gore bad mouths US to get Cheers-WE must PAY Gore & Carlyle group & Goldman Sacs(of shet)for our Carbons.
@wdgeo Global warming is a fraud or better yet, the biggest hoax promoted by a bunch of self lothing greedy bastards. It is all about the money. This guy shows you facts, now, prove where he is a fraud!
@wdgeo I watched parts 1 & 2 say it debunked virtually nothing in this video of Monckton excerpts, dealing largely in irrelevancies instead. Despite the seeming fairness when the rebuttal says such as "eccentricity does not make Monckton wrong, so let's look at the science," it seems the best science in this rebuttal is the ice sheet information from advanced satellite data, which says nothing about the fact that the sun itself is enough to account for the realities found. Little was debunked.
just google Mid-evil warm period and this whole video is put to rest ...the difference between the dildo Al Gore and this dildo is, Al have facts that OTHER people back up...this guy is just pulling shit out of his ass. The mid-evil warm period..was only slightly higher then the temps. from the 1950s and lower then the 1960's to the 1990's...from 1990 to 2010 it gets blown away. Added to the fact that temps were pretty much an educated guess from the mid-evil times.
Alright! Hummers for Everyone! 60 million cars running every second of every day couldn't be harmful. Clear cutting forests is what they were meant for. Cut em all down. Screw the eco-system, God put it here for ME! I'm so glad I don't have to be responsible for my existence now! This is great news!!!! I can do whatever I wish. YEAH!
The AGW camp recognized the problem with their name and changed "Global Warming" to "Climate Change", but the problem is they hijacked the earth's norm--it has been going through climate change for 4.6 billion years and man obviously wasn't around to force it to do so the vast majority of the time. Hard to deny "climate change", so they try to trick you into believing their hysteria by using sleight of hand. Bad boys!
The global warming theory should be tested against the best measurement we have, and that is earth itself. At this point, it appears the theory of anthropogenic (man-caused) warming isn't working out--there's more and more evidence that man's activities, primarily CO2 emissions, have little impact.
CO2 its not the only problem, but even small changes are enough to destroy a lot of life in the planet , just an increase of 1.5c in the ocean temperature is enough to kill a lot of life. Unfortunately this is not fiction science ,but its happening right now.
Thanks for the reply ,for sure i will be more than happy to dispute the facts and learn. As far as i know that was not much life before the Cambrian period ,most of the life was in the water. But that is not my point. What i really don't agree is compare the levels of co2 today with what was 540 millions ago to justify global warming . I agree that planets have a natural cycle of temperature ,but we are going way beyond of the natural cycle.
@chicozarro holocene period which temperatures were hotter than today lasted for about 2000 years roughly 7,000 to 5,000 years ago and the medieval warm period also hotter than today ended 1200AD (800 years ago CO2 has 800 year lag...) it was followed by the little ice age which we just came out of about 1800A.D temperatures have been falling since 1998, CO2 humans contribute is about 3% of 5.4% (which is a very small number), also temperature didn't spike with fuel usage whole theory is a fraud
If deondroclimatology is accurate, you'd know that a 1000 years ago it was warmer than today. Greenland was so named by the Vikings who farmed there. Far too cold for farming now. Wine grapes were grown in Scotland then. Again too cold now. Man then had no measurable effect. Your explanation?
Who said anything about temperature? I'm talking CO2. If you'll recall the little ice age (Maunder Minimum) ended around the 1850's. Nothing to do with the Industrial Revolution which really began in the 20th century. The lag works the other way. Gore, in his own ignorance, presented a graph which proved he was wrong in "An Inconvenient Truth". Look at it closely. If we totally eliminated man-made CO2 it would make no difference in the climate.
I love this guy that is talking about the Cambrian period to say that the co2 levels where higher then ahahahahahha !!!! You got to be kidding comparing a time that life was still been forming and today!!!!
Care to dispute the facts? Life forms exploded during the period. How much life existed before the Cambrian Period?
As CO2 increases its effect on warming decreases. The Stefan-Boltzmann law states it. That's temperature to the 4th power. Another words, large increases in CO2 yield very little change in temperature. BTW, our CO2 contribution is approx. 3% of the total.
So there is no global warming ???? The glaciers are not melting ??? The oceans temperature are not raising a looot ??? Its all a natural cicle ???? Aweeeessooome lets keep screwing the planet iaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaau!!!!! Just in case , lets find another planet to screw if we destroy this one!!!!
CO2 levels are no where near their highest ever. During the Cambrian Period, CO2 levels were around 7000ppm. Currently we are at about 380ppm. BTW, ice core samples clearly show temperature changes before CO2 (CO2 doesn't drive temperature).
That's not entirely true. Water only expands when at 0°C or below, or at 4°C or above. In any other cases than that, water "takes up the same space. So your statement isn't true.
A barrel floating in the ocean will grow a seaweed farm. It would be easy to create rainforest sized algae farms mid ocean. The seaweed farms would photosynthesis, as well as the lifeforms themselves would be made of carbon.
Cheap. Proactive. Harmless.
Also mid ocean seaweed (algae) farms could be towed to counties in need for emergency food fuel.
No downside.
Build seaweed farms from shore and tow them out to sea and anchor them. Polluting companies could sponsor the low costs.
Hey a lively debate exists all over the internet! That's great. Maybe it'll bring about reason. Too bad you don't get to see it on t.v though but then that's not the real world is it?
Maybe the thing to worry about is man's ridiculously high use of earth's resources when we all know that they are finite. This is especially true in the developed western world.
Love it how people pick and choose their science, a well established scientific theory being picked to death by these laughable ideas, i hope to god most of this stuff is just people taking the piss, and i expect much of it is, but to the loonies out there who want to believe its a communist plot, some earthquake, sun spots, volcanoes, or any of the rest, I say good luck to you but don't try to climb mountains of evidence using only your lips and remember we live in an actionable world.
"The world we created today as a result of our thinking thus far has problems which cannot be solved by thinking the way we thought when we created them." (Albert Einstein)
Please accept the obvious: 6.8billion people do make a change to earths climate!
Monckton must be driving the pseudo intellectuals out of their freaking minds. No one will debate him because he will destroy their credibility in about 2 minutes.
The CLIMATEDEPOT(dot)com website has some great new articles on all the scandals & malfeasance occuring daily at the IPCC & the GW scam
Open magazine has "The Climate Change Fraud" on its cover
The question now is, not that AGW is occuring, but how many people are going to be charged, & is this Al Gore's last flimflam scam?
Maybe Choo Choo Charlie & Al Gore can do the honorable thing & wrap their heads in Saran wrap & ring Marshal Applewhite for the UFO Taxi Service to Nibiru
@klnine well said? I was being sarcastic. i think that scientist who study this stuff will be taking their measurments at the appropriate points!,we aready have have an absurdly high standard of living, and billions more people in developing nations are are demanding the same.You should go to the library and check out how we used to live and die, horrible stuff, people have lost sight of how lucky we are, this is the only plant we have, and we a very very stupid species This man is frightening.
climate change isnt happening, or it is man made,and so there is nothing we can do about it anyway. Iam on the oil companies side on this one. It is probably a consiracy by electricians to make money from wiring up wind farms. We survived getting incinerated in the cold war, not because of any thing to do with luck, but because we are clever, therefore we can do anything, so keep youre hands of my cash, I wont change I want a better standard of living, I only own two cars, yep two,.......
IT IS great deal a political argument, If climate change does turn really nasty, we wont be able to deal with it anyway, We vote in government expecting they will increase our standard of living, they do their best to obligue, We just had a 'recession', and we could hardly cope with that without turning to crime to 'survive', we have had it if we really do need to make some drastic changes, heres hoping it does come to that, and we have had years to develop and commission alternative energies
Global Warming IS a good thing, look at earth's natural history, increase temp, increase humidity, increase bio-diversity. Even if all the ice on earth was to melt it would only raise the sea level a little over 100 ft. At current rates of change were more likely to be entering an ice age... WAKE UP!
I think thank you will find that the people who are inclined to be hostile to the Idea of Climate change being a Man made situation, also are right wing, subscribe to ideas like Princees di being murdered, No moon landing, and they read the daily mail.etc. It is a particular mentality. people also become distressed at the Idea that their absurbly high living standard is being threatened somehow. check out how we used to live and die. not pretty, renuables should have been in place years ago.
Ive watched and read an awful lot on both sides of this argument. Its so hard to discern the truth. Presumably in the next decade well either have seen this warming or not and well know for sure whether its a hoax or not.
Well it does sound suspicious, but the problem is without the context of those emails, its difficult to judge exactly what they are talking about. 'Hide the decline' could be a completely harmless statement in certain context. + It is only one of 4 datasets. Of course you may be right, it could be symptomatic of a wider deception. im not going to jump to any conclusions. well see what the inquiry yields.
@mcai9mh3 Yeah, I think in about 10-20 years the real truth will be revealed. And we will see who was right and who was wrong. It's a really interesting topic though isn't it? I never really followed global warming much at all until about 2-3 weeks ago, when for whatever reason ''The great global warming swindle'' popped up on my recommended videos. I've been hooked to this topic since! I always assumed it was man-made, but this whole thing has opened my eyes to the other side.
Just be careful. Every tim bob and harry on the internet think they are experts on the subject, but they normally decide based upon political prejudice. The sceptics have some very legitimate questions which deserve an answer, but please don't fall foul to the whole 'its a communist conspiracy' argument. Its a scientific argument, lets not pollute it with politics.
@mcai9mh3 Oh i agree, Whenever i watch a global warming skeptical video, if it involves anything other than the actual science (ie, new world order government) and things of that nature, i simply shut it off. Screw the politics, I want to see the actual science. i've been watching a lot of debates on here, and (in my opinion) the skeptical scientists are blowing the AGW scientists out of the water. You should look up ''John christy debate'' on here. Very interesting debate.
I read new scientist, most people in the scientific community read this,and climate change is just accepted as fact. I dont think it matters much anyway, If it is happening, we can just say that is a natural occurance, sunspots or whatever, so we could do nothing anyway. I look at it this way, we survived the cold war, and pure good luck played a part there, which just goes to show we are too stupid as a species to learn any leasons from even the recent past, to be able to resolve CC anyway.
in a few years it will be 6 degrees warmer :( say your final goodbyes and good buys while i bite my fingernails in fear *bite bite bite bite bite bite bite*
@rishakra Perfect example of the method of dialectic. They give both sides of the argument and let us argue. Are we having fun yet? Probably not, because there is no answer to be found here. In fact, this is just a distraction. The real issue is the trillion dollar carbon economy the thiefs are setting up. It won't be "good to hear" once they announce more green eco-taxes. Watch as the sheep volunteer to offset their carbon footprints. Then, watch as it cools down and they claim the victory.
anyone know why you can't find this full movie anywhere on the net? i can only find a shitty mp4 version and it won't allow me to burn it to dvd. why would this movie not be free considering the intent. anyone know where i can find a decent version or why i cannot?
You forgot that many other planets in our solar system have been heated up as well, and also that the temperature effect dependent on the amount of CO2 is logarithmic.
Isn't it so that the temperature has stood more or less _still_ the last 9 years after the El Niño warming? Just wondering.
I haven't forgotten about all the other planets, or about the logarithmic effects of CO2 on the atmosphere. It has an effect when there's none there, but doubling rapidly decreases its effects to almost insignificant.
Co2 was some 20x higher in Earth's past with no tipping point or runaway greenhouse.
Climate in the last 9 years appears to have cooled in the last 9 years. Hard to cover everything in 500 characters.
Yeah, it's just nice to hear that I'm not the only intelligent being on this planet who doesn't believe that the earth will be destroyed in 2012 due to man-made CO2 :P Keep up the good work.
The facts confirm that this global warming scare is a hoax, but can someone please explain to me the physics behind the logarithmic correlation between temperature and CO2 concentration - much appreciated.
Thanks for the suggestion MrOllyK. I did indeed found a lot of graphs all showing the logarithmic relation between CO2 concentration and rise in temperature. No doubt those graphs are correct, but I am really after a physical explanation for this logarithmic behavior - purely to satisfy my own curiosity :)
Thanks, but I just get a 'file not found' on that link.
Are you just examining someone else's interpretation or are you looking at the raw data? you can get the GISTEMPS data with a simple google search for the last 120 years (I havent been able to find the other datasets). It shows a decade of warming. Perhaps im wrong, but I thought even the skeptics agreed that the climate was warming, just disputed its cause.
I just picked the first one that came up. I prefer satellite data too. If you look you'll find it.
Hehe.. Such as Mann's hockey stick.. :)
I tend to go to the actual websites such as Vostok etc. The graphs they show are same as all over the place. You do have to be careful in some instances.
Of course you will never be a rich fat bastard liar like Al "co2" Gore !
He got 35 of his 35 facts wrong !
But think of this ... If he is right , haha, we need never worry about another ice age , which would certainly screw our little life up. We just issue everyone with a big V8 mounted on a skid and let the suckers run !
No. I'm for breathing clean air. Using scrubbers on smokestacks to remove toxins should be mandatory, but leave CO2 alone, as it feeds our plant life, which is why farmers use it in their greenhouses at elevated levels.
Mountain ranges etc. are these days put back and allowed to recover after extraction. In the West anyway. Don't ask me about China though..
Coal burning technology these days is almost stoichiometric and is very clean (except China).
@MrOllyK How can a mountain range recover from mountain top removal? The actually blow the top and side of the mountain out, and all the debris falls into the valley, choking up whatever lakes, rivers, streams, human habitations can be found there. Letting the mountain recover is kind of like letting a murder victim recover. Coal technology sucks. It's old. Stoichiometry doesn't matter, because we still need coal mines to get coal.
Solar, wind, tidal, hydroelectric, fusion are the way.
@MrOllyK We can't control what a volcano does, we can control what a mine does. Biofuel is not the answer either. When you say 'without the heavy subsidies, they go away,". . .why do they go away? Because the fossil fuel companies push them away. Gasoline engines are painfully inefficient. Fusion power is basically the holy grail, but the projects need more money, and I will bet that the fossil fuel companies are paying money to keep them from getting the money they need.
"renewable" energies are far more expensive and weaker than oil. Without heavy subsidies they'd be even more expensive and nobody would invest due to customer shortage. Price per pound, renewables are inefficient and costly.
Current engine tech is inefficient, but would you be happy to drive a H2 powered car, or would you worry that we'd run out of oceans making H2?
The only thing keeping oil companies from obtaining already discovered reserves are greenies and national parks.
@MrOllyK It's a trade off, you never get something for nothing. For instance, tidal. Drop the money to build the plant, and you get a little trickle of power but you don't have to do anything for it. The moon does all the work.
I would love to drive a fuel cell car. I would even drive a nuclear car. I forgot to mention fission power. Nuclear is the cleanest, greenest, and most efficient source of power out there. What, you want to demolish the national parks so you can drive to the mall
Trouble with renewables is they're largely ineffective, costly and intermittent right now so we have to back them up with conventional sources. The Sun, wind and tides aren't there all the time. Denmark can barely manage to contribute just 5% to its grid using wind - and they were expecting some 20% - world leading? Nup.
Fusion is the way to go and experiments with He3, rare on Earth, continue. Tritium decays into He3 but is also rare.
Another problem with wind turbines is the noise. Residents near wind farms weren't told and now can't sell their properties. The greenies might complain that wave and tide generators adversely affect coastal erosion. Bet you didn't know that solar panel efficiency can drop to just 60% in hot sun, since heat in a circuit creates resistance.
In any case, it's a start - but green feel-goodery does little to supplement, let alone replace, current demands.
For instance, take a look at electric cars. All well and good until you take into account the mess and cost of battery manufacture and recycling, which emits more CO2 than it saves. The power has to come from somewhere to recharge.
In 2007, there were some 254m passenger vehicles in the US alone. Imagine where the power would come from to charge the vast majority of them overnight. Power plant batteries charged by solar during the day? Wind? We have little choice right now.
In any case, CO2 isn't a problem. In the Jurassic, CO2 levels were some 10x today's, where life clearly thrived and delicate aragonite corals evolved in non-acid oceans. Proof of which are those pesky un-dissolved fossils cramming our museum shelves. In the Carboniferous there was up to 20x current CO2 levels and never a runaway greenhouse, ever.
We'll never reach those levels again, except in greehouses where farmers use high CO2 to max plant growth. It works - even in fish tanks!
Using the IPCC's bloated figures, to forestall just 1C of warming would require all industry to shut down. No cars, planes, trains, factories or campfires - for 30 years!! Back to the stone age.
Using the correct figures blows that out to some 200 years.
All the while Nature does as she likes while you shiver in your dark, damp cave wondering what went wrong with your little plan. History's warm periods prove prosperity on global scales, but Man and CO2 never caused any of them.
I'll leave you and your fellow greenies with this message:
Instead of complaining and blaming oil companies for the world's ills and corruption, prove it. Invent something to fill our planet with boundless energy at little cost to anything, immediately widely disseminate this technology so that you can't blame oil companies for buying your silence and blueprints. Educate yourself on the ocean's 60 year cycle, which is now in a cooling phase and why much of the NH is frozen solid.
Actually schwabe, the surface temperatures across the US only went up briefly due to the ban on aircraft flights, meaning there were no contrails reflecting the sun's rays. It returned to "normal" after the ban was lifted.
If slavery is wrong it is justified by the example of all the world... In all ages, one-half of mankind have been slaves. --- Charles Pinckney to the U.S. Constitutional Convention {1787}
If you haven't already, please check out climategate on youtube. If anything make sure that you question what you are being told. The global temperature has dropped over the last decade. Scientists are fudging the numbers. You don't have to agree, but at check it out.
The movie the day after tomorrow has a lot to answer for how stupid are we even if all the ice in the world melted it would not flood anything if it melts it would just replace itself becase its already displacing millions of tons of ocean water being ice if it melted it would just fill the massive hole it will leave in the ocean its already there its not like an extra billion tons of ocean water is going to appear from nowhere
It's true that a melting iceberg does not raise the ocean's level, for exactly the reason you mention -- the iceberg displaces water equal to its weight.
However, when land ice (glacier) enters the ocean, then the ocean's level is raised. A rise occurs either if the glacier melts and the water flows to the ocean, or an iceberg calves off the glacier.
While Arctic Ocean ice is floating, both Greenland and Antarctica contain a significant amount of land ice.
Latest measure is that 1,500 gigatons of ice perched over the ocean melted into it in the last 10 years, in Greenland. The bad news? 1/4th of this ice melted just in the last YEAR. In Antarctica currently we measure 220 gigatons of LAND ice melting per year, and this amount is increasing by 30 gigatons every year. The GW deniers will tell you than Antarctic SEA ice is increasing. Since its already on the ocean, who cares? This is the most critical issue of GW: its important to get it right.
There were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - just as Dr. Hans Blix said; But, the Republican media machine didn't want us to hear that.
And, there is NO dangerous climate change caused by human carbon dioxide - just as the "independent scientists" are now trying to tell us! But, the Democrat media machine doesn't want us to hear that.
We are made to run from one boogieman to the next, as each political party achieves its own agendas for themselves & their money mates.
If you are here, you are at least interested in this subject. If you believe in global warming OR not, this treaty is BAD FOR AMERICA. Please call the White House and tell Pres O. NOT TO SIGN. Time is running out, & he's still looking for "a comprehensive deal at Copenhagen" per the UK Guardian 11/17. U.S. media hardly even mentions such an important treaty. WHY?
PLEASE call, and get everyone you know to call & tell him NOT TO SIGN!
NASA, NOAA, MIT, Harvard, IPCC, University of California, Science Magazine, Nature Magazine, Oxford, Cambridge, The Royal Society all warn of Global Warming.
Solar Irradiance has had no NET increase for 34 years since 1975. We have excellent satellite data to prove it.
Yet, arctic ice and mountain glaciers have shrunk nearly 50% the last 34 years due to Global Warming.
So you see Canadas boreal cannot be responsible for 90% of world's oxygen.
Siberian boreal is larger than Canadian boreal meaning that if boreal were the sole supplier of oxygen - which it isn't - then canadian would be less than 50%. Think about it. You cannot have a smaller half larger than 49%. (logic NOT science)
It is estimated that between 70% and 80% of the oxygen in the atmosphere is produced by marine plants . Nearly all marine plants are single celled, photosynthetic algae.
source - ecologydotcom
phytoplankton produce almost half the oxygen you breathe.
source - NASA
ocean is water
water is h20
if water-splitting occured naturally - & frequently - we'd all explode.
What happened to the ice age,predicted in 1970s by scientists,we were supposed to be in?Global warming,"climate change" whatever they are calling now,is just another money racket to control people's lives,to pass insane laws and scare people.Total bullshit-Ive always known it.
"My Weekly Reader" (the magazine that was passed out among elementary school students) reported on the imminent, unavoidable, upcoming ice-age in 1972.
@OnlyAPawn1970 George Will, the author of the 1975 Newsweek article you're indirectly referring to, said, "the article summarized the science of the time. Since then, numerous climate-sensing satellites have gone into orbit and theoretical understanding of atmospheric chemistry has improved considerably. I have occasionally thought of publishing an update to the article, but Ive always decided that such an action would garner unwanted notoriety without changing any minds."
What I love is that "scientists" tell us that GW is all our fault!
If we read history books or listen to historians they tell us the world has warmed up and cooled down, with evidence available in fossils and such like.
For those "scientists" isnt it just remotely possible that the giant ball of fire at the centre of the solar system(the sun) may be to blame?
NASA have even admitted ALL the planets have increased in temperature.
Wikipedia article for Scientific opinion on climate change:
"With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change."
NO REMAINING SCIENTIFIC BODY. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. CERO. Got it???
The boreal forest plays a significant role in the earth's environmental balance. Besides being a producer of oxygen, the boreal forest absorbs and stores carbon dioxide and so plays a critical role in mitigating global warming. Canadians cannot forget they are custodian to one third of this essential global resource.
- CNR
All well and good, but if the two-thirds that are not in Canada gets felled - then what?????
Russians are chopping down their Siberian boreal like crazy.
Canada's boreal forest is part of a great northern circumpolar band of mostly coniferous trees extending across the subarctic latitudes of Russia, Scandinavia and North America. Globally, the boreal forest comprises almost 25% of the world's closed canopy forest as well as vast expanses of open transitional forest.
Scientists have received $100 billion in funding from governments to " prove " the link between climate change and CO2. They have failed totally. AGW is a scam, just follow the money trail - and check out the uninformed comments from the " bed wetters" here on youtube.
this entire video is explaining that everything you just said is all hearsay. The amount of CO2 we produce annually doesn't even come close to the amount of CO2 a volcano releases during an eruption. The other problem with global warming is that it's SUPPOSED to happen. The ice age was caused when meteor hit the earth all blacked out the sun. The planet still has winter BECAUSE of that meteor. Did you also know that the ozone has not only been repairing itself, but getting thicker?
90% of the oxygen that we need for the entire earth is produced by the by the Boreal forest in Canada. We (Canada) aren't chopping it down. It's preserved and will remain that way because we know we need it to survive. Trees being cut down anywhere else, to the degree we're chopping them down, isn't effecting us one bit.
The part part of your comment is all the proofs you give. Seriously, look it up. Canada's Boreal Forest is responsible for cleaning the earths air at an extremely fast rate.
Monckton is listed as a "Global Warming" expert for the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based freemarket think tank.
The Heartland Institute frequently attacks the scientific evidence for human-caused climate change. The Heartland Institute has received over $791,000 from oil-giant ExxonMobil since 1998.
Note the lack of ad hominem or any other phrase used to condescend
Oh yeah, yet another git who wants to us 2believe that there's a green conspiracy that wants to put paid to the oil conspiracy that rednecks fail 2 acknowledge because according to Genesis 'on the third day God gave us oil to pollute and said, "go choppest down thou trees so thou can evolve into CO2 breathing three-legged plants to compensate."
Yep... another Corporate prick who prefers the good life so long as we dont get ours.
why listen to this guy about tainted stats on ice loss in green land? why not ask somone who actually lives there, or the people who live in north west terratories in canada who see lakes bubbling with mathane gas with the absence of the perma frost
Even if global warming is not caused by co2 emmisions.... for fuck sakes it is responsible for thousands of smog related deaths ( I had to move out of my beloved Toronto cuz I couldn't breath properly anymore) and we are running out of oil anyway and need to replace it, So if we battle our co2 emmisions we will have an oil replacement before it is total crisis, smog will be less, acid rain will be less..... so to argue against global warming is mute.
Why, because you say so? Is it a stand alone way to quantify the warming of the earth? The martian ice cap is evaporating at a similar rate as earth's glaciers...Do we take ice core samples from there?
the ice drilled in the antartic and green land had trapped air for hunderds of thousands of years which scientest analize, there has never been as much co2 in the atmosphere as of now,
Monckton has proven he is not a scientist the moment he mentioned Mars and Jupiter. He infers that solar activity is causing global warming on other planets when the TSI has been unchanged for over 30 years.
In the meantime, please keep the parodies flowing: the crumbling Alarmist Empire needs ALL the moral support it can muster (and it's not at all fussy about WHO provides it).
K i'm new to this thought i'd replied to individuals comments not the just the video... so excuse the fact that them all being put together here makes me look like a random ranter! lol!
So Monckton's a Muppet ? Thanks for sharing that with us - together with your lucid exposition of Climate Science !
From now on, I'm ignoring EVERYTHING written and said by (inter alios): Singer, Landsea, Spencer, Morner, Tennekes, Reiter, Akosofu, Zichichi, Jaworowski, Idso, and all the other muppets.
And that includes Mother Earth, too: she seems NOT to be li
So if the sun is being "remarkably active" then are we on the cusp of another 1859 solar storm?
ptevans01 2 weeks ago in playlist Global Warming Hoax
This has been flagged as spam show
It's the sun, stupid. Following the Medieval Warming Period (about the same temps as now), there were a number of solar minimums between 1250 and 1850 (Wolf, Sporer, Maunder & Dalton) that caused the Little Ice Age (LIA). Since the LIA, there haven't been ANY solar minimums, so global temps have risen naturally. The current solar max peaked in 1990 & we seem to be in a new solar minimum, which explains why no warming since 1998. CO2 had NOTHING to do with it. CAGW is dead; see Climategate 2.0
samuraiconservative 2 months ago
Its amazing what a little upper class English accent, a few past political credentials and a series of quote mines can do. And this man has the nerve to talk about what Al Gore is doing?
123backinyerface 7 months ago
@123backinyerface: He is doing the EXACT same thing as Al Gore, that is the point. But Algore gets publicized far beyond this man b/c the interestest behind Algore fund him better. It is all the IPCC & politics behind this Chicken Little scare story.
VictorLepanto 2 weeks ago
in case anyone doesn't understand the deeper meaning of YooTubeCritc's message - the elite masters of the UN are lizard people from the center of the Earth.
cthulhu11111111 10 months ago
@cthulhu11111111 Flagged as spam
CokeSupply 8 months ago
@CokeSupply
how much is the UN paying you per day to silence the truth about their elite masters?
cthulhu11111111 8 months ago
@cthulhu11111111 The same amount the lizard people are paying you!
CokeSupply 8 months ago
fuck the UN and its elite masters.. the UN wants carbon taxes so they can fund thier one world new order.. every carbon tax suggested has a certain % promised to the UN. They want people to pay for their own slavery and you know what? A lot of fucking idiots will. Look up wiki leaks and climate gate if you want to see what the IPCC is all about.. Fuck em all
YooTubeCritc 10 months ago
his eye look like fallig out
vichuda1000 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Anthropogenic Global Warming is caused by human increases in fossil fuel CO2 PPM from 300 PPM for the last 800,000 years at least to the industrial revolution, to 390 PPM now.
qwertypoiu4321 11 months ago
Furthermore, gasoline engines can't be much more efficient than they already are. It's about the delta K between the hot reservoir and the cold reservoir, and when you do the math, things look very grim. Sure, you can do things like pump exhaust gases back into engine and things like that, but the bottom line is that combustion is at 19th century technology, and we are in the 21st now.
xaoseph 1 year ago
Al Gore's climate scientists have found that CO2 emissions from the US are the sole cause for Global Warming and that carbon taxes implemented on the US, will stop Global Warming. China and India's CO2 emissions have nothing to do with it.
JoeJohn90 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Al Gore's paid climate scientists studies have found, CO2 emissions from the US are the problem, not CO2 emissions from India or China
JoeJohn90 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Just because you can't prove it's happening doesn't mean we should ignore all the chemicals we release into the environment, something bad will happen eventually.
eyeofmankind 1 year ago
The inconvenient truth about Al Gore's movie is that he lied and has admitted it
kenf1ott 1 year ago
Let no individualization of anything stymie the collectivists' corruptive talents in destroying all things that make the human experience worthwhile and progressive. We, who hoard, are light years behind those who stock-pile. We, who bathe, are uncomplicated and unfettered and unmarred and unobstructed in our minds and in our hearts and in Spirit and in conscience.
OneDollarBook 1 year ago
i detect doubt, why? the repubs say it is not happening, why play around? it isn't over what caused it, it is whether or not it is happening. when the repubs and/or dems figure out if it is happening, then figure out the caquse. it stands, the same, the repubs say it isn't happening and the dems are in the closet saying it is. who do you listen too?
DamWarden 1 year ago
@DamWarden Of course the cause of the warming matters! Please tell me I misunderstood your point? If the cause is not anthropogenic in nature then no amount of hobbiling our economy will change that. If the cause it not anthropogenic in nature then instead of focusing on ways in which to reverse the trend we shoul dbe focusing on dealing with the otherwise inevitable results. We absolutely need to know the cause of the warming if there is infact any warming at all.
captwasabi 1 year ago
Mummer Katharine Hepburn strove to destroy traditional Western values as she had promoted lesbianism (in the guise of women's liberation), the notion of sacred victims' group-rights (domestic violence and "hate"-crime laws), sustained development (population control, also known as eugenics) and infanticide (abortion)--all are the tenets of cultural Marxism. We must find someone more worthy of our selfless adoration. (British Petroleum has provided oil with a free trip to the beach!)
OneDollarBook 1 year ago
Plain Jane Goodall, Jacques Cousteau, Prince Phillip, Ted Turner, Obama, Julian & Aldous Huxley, Bertrand Russell, Margaret Sanger, Adolf Hitler, Herbert Geo. Wells, Paul Ehrlich {of "The Population Bomb"/"End of Affluence" infamy}, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Teddy Roosevelt & Pol Pot are unapologetic eugenicists. They preach "bio-ethics"; "animal rights" & "sustainability" which ALWAYS subjects the impoverished people of the Earth to forced sterilizations/abortions, vaccinations & "euthanasia."
OneDollarBook 1 year ago
@OneDollarBook How are the meds working? Your dosage seems to be slipping. I love it when people come out against eugenics. Of course you ignore the fact that this process takes place in just about every other species in the world but of course humans like to pretend they are not animals. Eugenics is nothing more than the attempt to improve humanity by preventing those with inheritable genetic malformities from reproducing. Seems like a good idea to me.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@captwasabi : Population control/reduction begins with you. I didn't pretend that YOU are not an animal. I believe that hunting season should be all about tracking and bagging you.
OneDollarBook 1 year ago
@OneDollarBook Yeah. You might want to talk to your Dr about adjusting your dosage.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@captwasabi : Where's your gay-pride now?
OneDollarBook 1 year ago
@OneDollarBook Enjoy the electro-convulsive therapy sessions.
captwasabi 1 year ago
THANK GOD. I am sick of all this Global warming crap. Arghh.
PinmanX 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Al GORE-YOU are no Patriot, I heard you are a RAPIST! Your a Benedict Arnold to our Country-Anyone who receives a "Nobel Piece (of shet) Prize" is a TRADER (see Obama Kenyan Immigrant)to America. Listen to this Crap Head blame America-everyone in Bali cheers-Yea they blame all worlds problems on America, Gore bad mouths US to get Cheers-WE must PAY Gore & Carlyle group & Goldman Sacs(of shet)for our Carbons.
exposetruthwolf 1 year ago
Monckton is a F RA U D ! Examine the FACTS and decide for yourself!
wdgeo 1 year ago
@wdgeo Global warming is a fraud or better yet, the biggest hoax promoted by a bunch of self lothing greedy bastards. It is all about the money. This guy shows you facts, now, prove where he is a fraud!
daveh69 1 year ago
@daveh69 and everyone else..
.. once again, for a complete and total debunking of old Lord Swiveleyes here watch this: /watch?v=JfA1LpiYk2o
wdgeo 1 year ago
@wdgeo I watched parts 1 & 2 say it debunked virtually nothing in this video of Monckton excerpts, dealing largely in irrelevancies instead. Despite the seeming fairness when the rebuttal says such as "eccentricity does not make Monckton wrong, so let's look at the science," it seems the best science in this rebuttal is the ice sheet information from advanced satellite data, which says nothing about the fact that the sun itself is enough to account for the realities found. Little was debunked.
skidancin 1 year ago
just google Mid-evil warm period and this whole video is put to rest ...the difference between the dildo Al Gore and this dildo is, Al have facts that OTHER people back up...this guy is just pulling shit out of his ass. The mid-evil warm period..was only slightly higher then the temps. from the 1950s and lower then the 1960's to the 1990's...from 1990 to 2010 it gets blown away. Added to the fact that temps were pretty much an educated guess from the mid-evil times.
brian4480 1 year ago
Alright! Hummers for Everyone! 60 million cars running every second of every day couldn't be harmful. Clear cutting forests is what they were meant for. Cut em all down. Screw the eco-system, God put it here for ME! I'm so glad I don't have to be responsible for my existence now! This is great news!!!! I can do whatever I wish. YEAH!
flushnut 1 year ago
i just love his bow-tie ... so British, eh what?
phoeniximperator 1 year ago
The AGW camp recognized the problem with their name and changed "Global Warming" to "Climate Change", but the problem is they hijacked the earth's norm--it has been going through climate change for 4.6 billion years and man obviously wasn't around to force it to do so the vast majority of the time. Hard to deny "climate change", so they try to trick you into believing their hysteria by using sleight of hand. Bad boys!
Rockyspoon09 1 year ago
The global warming theory should be tested against the best measurement we have, and that is earth itself. At this point, it appears the theory of anthropogenic (man-caused) warming isn't working out--there's more and more evidence that man's activities, primarily CO2 emissions, have little impact.
Rockyspoon09 1 year ago
@Rockyspoon09 BUZZZZ!!! Wrong! Monckton is a F RA U D ! Examine the FACTS and decide for yourself!
/watch?v=JfA1LpiYk2o
wdgeo 1 year ago
Comment removed
daPlumber702 1 year ago
CO2 its not the only problem, but even small changes are enough to destroy a lot of life in the planet , just an increase of 1.5c in the ocean temperature is enough to kill a lot of life. Unfortunately this is not fiction science ,but its happening right now.
chicozarro 1 year ago
@informedskeptic
Thanks for the reply ,for sure i will be more than happy to dispute the facts and learn. As far as i know that was not much life before the Cambrian period ,most of the life was in the water. But that is not my point. What i really don't agree is compare the levels of co2 today with what was 540 millions ago to justify global warming . I agree that planets have a natural cycle of temperature ,but we are going way beyond of the natural cycle.
chicozarro 1 year ago
@chicozarro holocene period which temperatures were hotter than today lasted for about 2000 years roughly 7,000 to 5,000 years ago and the medieval warm period also hotter than today ended 1200AD (800 years ago CO2 has 800 year lag...) it was followed by the little ice age which we just came out of about 1800A.D temperatures have been falling since 1998, CO2 humans contribute is about 3% of 5.4% (which is a very small number), also temperature didn't spike with fuel usage whole theory is a fraud
1TrueFreedom 1 year ago
@TheXavierLee
If deondroclimatology is accurate, you'd know that a 1000 years ago it was warmer than today. Greenland was so named by the Vikings who farmed there. Far too cold for farming now. Wine grapes were grown in Scotland then. Again too cold now. Man then had no measurable effect. Your explanation?
informedskeptic 1 year ago
@TheXavierLee
Who said anything about temperature? I'm talking CO2. If you'll recall the little ice age (Maunder Minimum) ended around the 1850's. Nothing to do with the Industrial Revolution which really began in the 20th century. The lag works the other way. Gore, in his own ignorance, presented a graph which proved he was wrong in "An Inconvenient Truth". Look at it closely. If we totally eliminated man-made CO2 it would make no difference in the climate.
informedskeptic 1 year ago
I love this guy that is talking about the Cambrian period to say that the co2 levels where higher then ahahahahahha !!!! You got to be kidding comparing a time that life was still been forming and today!!!!
chicozarro 1 year ago
@chicozarro
Care to dispute the facts? Life forms exploded during the period. How much life existed before the Cambrian Period?
As CO2 increases its effect on warming decreases. The Stefan-Boltzmann law states it. That's temperature to the 4th power. Another words, large increases in CO2 yield very little change in temperature. BTW, our CO2 contribution is approx. 3% of the total.
informedskeptic 1 year ago
So there is no global warming ???? The glaciers are not melting ??? The oceans temperature are not raising a looot ??? Its all a natural cicle ???? Aweeeessooome lets keep screwing the planet iaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaau!!!!! Just in case , lets find another planet to screw if we destroy this one!!!!
chicozarro 1 year ago
CO2 levels are no where near their highest ever. During the Cambrian Period, CO2 levels were around 7000ppm. Currently we are at about 380ppm. BTW, ice core samples clearly show temperature changes before CO2 (CO2 doesn't drive temperature).
informedskeptic 1 year ago
That's not entirely true. Water only expands when at 0°C or below, or at 4°C or above. In any other cases than that, water "takes up the same space. So your statement isn't true.
ToshiroDK 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A barrel floating in the ocean will grow a seaweed farm. It would be easy to create rainforest sized algae farms mid ocean. The seaweed farms would photosynthesis, as well as the lifeforms themselves would be made of carbon.
Cheap. Proactive. Harmless.
Also mid ocean seaweed (algae) farms could be towed to counties in need for emergency food fuel.
No downside.
Build seaweed farms from shore and tow them out to sea and anchor them. Polluting companies could sponsor the low costs.
Win Win Win
RichLOAguy 1 year ago
I hear Fox News knows everything and doesn't try and trick anyone either. they are an honest team.. the epitome of what all jackasses should do!
emeralds222 1 year ago
Hey a lively debate exists all over the internet! That's great. Maybe it'll bring about reason. Too bad you don't get to see it on t.v though but then that's not the real world is it?
surfmcgoogler 1 year ago
Maybe the thing to worry about is man's ridiculously high use of earth's resources when we all know that they are finite. This is especially true in the developed western world.
ravrik 1 year ago
Love it how people pick and choose their science, a well established scientific theory being picked to death by these laughable ideas, i hope to god most of this stuff is just people taking the piss, and i expect much of it is, but to the loonies out there who want to believe its a communist plot, some earthquake, sun spots, volcanoes, or any of the rest, I say good luck to you but don't try to climb mountains of evidence using only your lips and remember we live in an actionable world.
BraniusBalki 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The world we created today as a result of our thinking thus far has problems which cannot be solved by thinking the way we thought when we created them." (Albert Einstein)
Please accept the obvious: 6.8billion people do make a change to earths climate!
guldisloo11 1 year ago
Monckton must be driving the pseudo intellectuals out of their freaking minds. No one will debate him because he will destroy their credibility in about 2 minutes.
MottTheWot 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey everybody,
The CLIMATEDEPOT(dot)com website has some great new articles on all the scandals & malfeasance occuring daily at the IPCC & the GW scam
Open magazine has "The Climate Change Fraud" on its cover
The question now is, not that AGW is occuring, but how many people are going to be charged, & is this Al Gore's last flimflam scam?
Maybe Choo Choo Charlie & Al Gore can do the honorable thing & wrap their heads in Saran wrap & ring Marshal Applewhite for the UFO Taxi Service to Nibiru
Thisawareness 2 years ago
Well said , thanks!!!!!!!!!!
By the way the only real way to measure a truly representative global temperature is by treating the earth as a point source (School physics)
ANd what do we do stick thermometers on land near cities and add those to tere ring temperatures ..very scientific eh ?
klnine 2 years ago
@klnine well said? I was being sarcastic. i think that scientist who study this stuff will be taking their measurments at the appropriate points!,we aready have have an absurdly high standard of living, and billions more people in developing nations are are demanding the same.You should go to the library and check out how we used to live and die, horrible stuff, people have lost sight of how lucky we are, this is the only plant we have, and we a very very stupid species This man is frightening.
mcwolfus 2 years ago
climate change isnt happening, or it is man made,and so there is nothing we can do about it anyway. Iam on the oil companies side on this one. It is probably a consiracy by electricians to make money from wiring up wind farms. We survived getting incinerated in the cold war, not because of any thing to do with luck, but because we are clever, therefore we can do anything, so keep youre hands of my cash, I wont change I want a better standard of living, I only own two cars, yep two,.......
mcwolfus 2 years ago
IT IS great deal a political argument, If climate change does turn really nasty, we wont be able to deal with it anyway, We vote in government expecting they will increase our standard of living, they do their best to obligue, We just had a 'recession', and we could hardly cope with that without turning to crime to 'survive', we have had it if we really do need to make some drastic changes, heres hoping it does come to that, and we have had years to develop and commission alternative energies
SuperAndy8888 2 years ago
Global Warming IS a good thing, look at earth's natural history, increase temp, increase humidity, increase bio-diversity. Even if all the ice on earth was to melt it would only raise the sea level a little over 100 ft. At current rates of change were more likely to be entering an ice age... WAKE UP!
WoodlandRavah 2 years ago
I think thank you will find that the people who are inclined to be hostile to the Idea of Climate change being a Man made situation, also are right wing, subscribe to ideas like Princees di being murdered, No moon landing, and they read the daily mail.etc. It is a particular mentality. people also become distressed at the Idea that their absurbly high living standard is being threatened somehow. check out how we used to live and die. not pretty, renuables should have been in place years ago.
mcwolfus 2 years ago
Ive watched and read an awful lot on both sides of this argument. Its so hard to discern the truth. Presumably in the next decade well either have seen this warming or not and well know for sure whether its a hoax or not.
mcai9mh3 2 years ago
@mcai9mh3 I was in your situation, then climategate happened and i think that solidified my belief on the whole thing.
RepublicanNatio 2 years ago
Well it does sound suspicious, but the problem is without the context of those emails, its difficult to judge exactly what they are talking about. 'Hide the decline' could be a completely harmless statement in certain context. + It is only one of 4 datasets. Of course you may be right, it could be symptomatic of a wider deception. im not going to jump to any conclusions. well see what the inquiry yields.
mcai9mh3 2 years ago
@mcai9mh3 Yeah, I think in about 10-20 years the real truth will be revealed. And we will see who was right and who was wrong. It's a really interesting topic though isn't it? I never really followed global warming much at all until about 2-3 weeks ago, when for whatever reason ''The great global warming swindle'' popped up on my recommended videos. I've been hooked to this topic since! I always assumed it was man-made, but this whole thing has opened my eyes to the other side.
RepublicanNatio 2 years ago
Good to see people keeping an open mind to it!
Just be careful. Every tim bob and harry on the internet think they are experts on the subject, but they normally decide based upon political prejudice. The sceptics have some very legitimate questions which deserve an answer, but please don't fall foul to the whole 'its a communist conspiracy' argument. Its a scientific argument, lets not pollute it with politics.
mcai9mh3 2 years ago
@mcai9mh3 Oh i agree, Whenever i watch a global warming skeptical video, if it involves anything other than the actual science (ie, new world order government) and things of that nature, i simply shut it off. Screw the politics, I want to see the actual science. i've been watching a lot of debates on here, and (in my opinion) the skeptical scientists are blowing the AGW scientists out of the water. You should look up ''John christy debate'' on here. Very interesting debate.
RepublicanNatio 2 years ago
I read new scientist, most people in the scientific community read this,and climate change is just accepted as fact. I dont think it matters much anyway, If it is happening, we can just say that is a natural occurance, sunspots or whatever, so we could do nothing anyway. I look at it this way, we survived the cold war, and pure good luck played a part there, which just goes to show we are too stupid as a species to learn any leasons from even the recent past, to be able to resolve CC anyway.
mcwolfus 2 years ago
Where can I get the whole film?
Reptilianmuseum 2 years ago
in a few years it will be 6 degrees warmer :( say your final goodbyes and good buys while i bite my fingernails in fear *bite bite bite bite bite bite bite*
Giok8 2 years ago
This is a very helpful summary. It's always good to hear both sides and Lord Monckton provides an excellent counterpoint to Algore's Manbearpig!
rishakra 2 years ago 10
@rishakra Perfect example of the method of dialectic. They give both sides of the argument and let us argue. Are we having fun yet? Probably not, because there is no answer to be found here. In fact, this is just a distraction. The real issue is the trillion dollar carbon economy the thiefs are setting up. It won't be "good to hear" once they announce more green eco-taxes. Watch as the sheep volunteer to offset their carbon footprints. Then, watch as it cools down and they claim the victory.
fr33light 1 year ago
California is the very part that should have been influenced badly, into drought, by HAARP activity!!!
karatekla 2 years ago
anyone know why you can't find this full movie anywhere on the net? i can only find a shitty mp4 version and it won't allow me to burn it to dvd. why would this movie not be free considering the intent. anyone know where i can find a decent version or why i cannot?
saturatedfact 2 years ago
Fact: The climate has always changed and always will.
Fact: Temperature change PRECEDES CO2 level change by average 800 years.
Fact: 1000 years ago temp was much higher than today without man's influence.
Fact: The IPCC uses graphs starting only 200 years ago from the end of the little ice age to assert AGW.
Fact: REAL science is being stifled by the IPCC and Govt.
Fact: Cooling is worse as grain doesn't grow in ice.
Fact: We've been cooling for the last 9 years!
MrOllyK 2 years ago 10
You forgot that many other planets in our solar system have been heated up as well, and also that the temperature effect dependent on the amount of CO2 is logarithmic.
Isn't it so that the temperature has stood more or less _still_ the last 9 years after the El Niño warming? Just wondering.
Epzilohn 2 years ago 3
You're absolutely right Epzilohn..
I haven't forgotten about all the other planets, or about the logarithmic effects of CO2 on the atmosphere. It has an effect when there's none there, but doubling rapidly decreases its effects to almost insignificant.
Co2 was some 20x higher in Earth's past with no tipping point or runaway greenhouse.
Climate in the last 9 years appears to have cooled in the last 9 years. Hard to cover everything in 500 characters.
Thanks Epzilohn. Thumbs up to you.
MrOllyK 2 years ago 3
Yeah, it's just nice to hear that I'm not the only intelligent being on this planet who doesn't believe that the earth will be destroyed in 2012 due to man-made CO2 :P Keep up the good work.
Epzilohn 2 years ago 3
The facts confirm that this global warming scare is a hoax, but can someone please explain to me the physics behind the logarithmic correlation between temperature and CO2 concentration - much appreciated.
oomblikkies 2 years ago
oomblikkies..
You might want to google image search for "CO2 logarithmic". You'll find plenty of graphs that explain it. Cheers.. :)
MrOllyK 2 years ago
Thanks for the suggestion MrOllyK. I did indeed found a lot of graphs all showing the logarithmic relation between CO2 concentration and rise in temperature. No doubt those graphs are correct, but I am really after a physical explanation for this logarithmic behavior - purely to satisfy my own curiosity :)
oomblikkies 2 years ago
oomblikkies..
It's difficult to find a simple layman's explanation but try these 2 sites:
brneurosci . org/co2 . html
w . junkscience . com/Greenhouse
MrOllyK 2 years ago
just out of interest, when you say we've been cooling for the past 9 years where are you getting your data from?
mcai9mh3 2 years ago
mcai9..
Just about everywhere, but this site will show you:
img690 . imageshack . us/i/trend2 .png
MrOllyK 2 years ago
Thanks, but I just get a 'file not found' on that link.
Are you just examining someone else's interpretation or are you looking at the raw data? you can get the GISTEMPS data with a simple google search for the last 120 years (I havent been able to find the other datasets). It shows a decade of warming. Perhaps im wrong, but I thought even the skeptics agreed that the climate was warming, just disputed its cause.
mcai9mh3 2 years ago
Sorry mcai9, try this link:
w . hyscience . com/archives/2009/07/on_climate_chan . php
I wouldn't use GISS data as much of it is corrupt and massaged due to heat island effects etc.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
Thanks for the link, but that looks like a political site which makes me suspicous. That graph uses CRUT3 but doesnt have a link to the raw data.
Following on from the 'Climategate' scandle you can now download unadjusted GISTEMPS from the NASA website.
I really wouldnt beleive any pretty graphs you see on websites, the internet is full of them showing all sorts of things.
mcai9mh3 2 years ago
mcai9..
I just picked the first one that came up. I prefer satellite data too. If you look you'll find it.
Hehe.. Such as Mann's hockey stick.. :)
I tend to go to the actual websites such as Vostok etc. The graphs they show are same as all over the place. You do have to be careful in some instances.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
Well said - 7 out of 7 .
Of course you will never be a rich fat bastard liar like Al "co2" Gore !
He got 35 of his 35 facts wrong !
But think of this ... If he is right , haha, we need never worry about another ice age , which would certainly screw our little life up. We just issue everyone with a big V8 mounted on a skid and let the suckers run !
klnine 2 years ago
@MrOllyK:
Your "facts" need a lot correcting.
#1: No true.
#2: It was not a global event.
#3: The past is not related to the present.
#4: No comment
#5: We are not having a cooling event.
#6: The cooling is not statistically significant (i.e., can be random fluctuation) and only skeptics cite it.
GurgleGurgleBlahBlah 1 year ago
@GurgleGurgleBlahBlah LMAO PAST IS NOT RELATED TO PRESENT LMAO! don't ever talk like you know anything ever again lol
1TrueFreedom 1 year ago
@MrOllyK So you are saying it's okay to burn up all the carbon, poison the air and water, and blow up mountain ranges and valleys in search of coal?
xaoseph 1 year ago
@xaoseph
No. I'm for breathing clean air. Using scrubbers on smokestacks to remove toxins should be mandatory, but leave CO2 alone, as it feeds our plant life, which is why farmers use it in their greenhouses at elevated levels.
Mountain ranges etc. are these days put back and allowed to recover after extraction. In the West anyway. Don't ask me about China though..
Coal burning technology these days is almost stoichiometric and is very clean (except China).
Burn up all the carbon? Pfft..!
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@MrOllyK How can a mountain range recover from mountain top removal? The actually blow the top and side of the mountain out, and all the debris falls into the valley, choking up whatever lakes, rivers, streams, human habitations can be found there. Letting the mountain recover is kind of like letting a murder victim recover. Coal technology sucks. It's old. Stoichiometry doesn't matter, because we still need coal mines to get coal.
Solar, wind, tidal, hydroelectric, fusion are the way.
xaoseph 1 year ago
@xaoseph
Ever seen what a volcano does? Far worse than mining. Be glad you can switch on a light so easy. You need mines for the nickel in your watch!
"Solar, wind, tidal, hydroelectric, fusion are the way"
Sure, but what about the heavy subsidies? Without them they go away:
thegwpf. org/energy-news/2078-the-wind-subsidy-bubble. html
Ethanol? Check out the food riots in poor countries thanks to"biofuels":
ww w. mrc. org/bmi/articles/2008/Ethanol_Being_Blamed_for_Global_Food_Riots_. html
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@MrOllyK We can't control what a volcano does, we can control what a mine does. Biofuel is not the answer either. When you say 'without the heavy subsidies, they go away,". . .why do they go away? Because the fossil fuel companies push them away. Gasoline engines are painfully inefficient. Fusion power is basically the holy grail, but the projects need more money, and I will bet that the fossil fuel companies are paying money to keep them from getting the money they need.
xaoseph 1 year ago
@xaoseph
"renewable" energies are far more expensive and weaker than oil. Without heavy subsidies they'd be even more expensive and nobody would invest due to customer shortage. Price per pound, renewables are inefficient and costly.
Current engine tech is inefficient, but would you be happy to drive a H2 powered car, or would you worry that we'd run out of oceans making H2?
The only thing keeping oil companies from obtaining already discovered reserves are greenies and national parks.
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@MrOllyK It's a trade off, you never get something for nothing. For instance, tidal. Drop the money to build the plant, and you get a little trickle of power but you don't have to do anything for it. The moon does all the work.
I would love to drive a fuel cell car. I would even drive a nuclear car. I forgot to mention fission power. Nuclear is the cleanest, greenest, and most efficient source of power out there. What, you want to demolish the national parks so you can drive to the mall
xaoseph 1 year ago
@xaoseph
I'm only 700m from town so I normally walk.
Trouble with renewables is they're largely ineffective, costly and intermittent right now so we have to back them up with conventional sources. The Sun, wind and tides aren't there all the time. Denmark can barely manage to contribute just 5% to its grid using wind - and they were expecting some 20% - world leading? Nup.
Fusion is the way to go and experiments with He3, rare on Earth, continue. Tritium decays into He3 but is also rare.
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@xaoseph
Another problem with wind turbines is the noise. Residents near wind farms weren't told and now can't sell their properties. The greenies might complain that wave and tide generators adversely affect coastal erosion. Bet you didn't know that solar panel efficiency can drop to just 60% in hot sun, since heat in a circuit creates resistance.
In any case, it's a start - but green feel-goodery does little to supplement, let alone replace, current demands.
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@xaoseph
For instance, take a look at electric cars. All well and good until you take into account the mess and cost of battery manufacture and recycling, which emits more CO2 than it saves. The power has to come from somewhere to recharge.
In 2007, there were some 254m passenger vehicles in the US alone. Imagine where the power would come from to charge the vast majority of them overnight. Power plant batteries charged by solar during the day? Wind? We have little choice right now.
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@xaoseph
In any case, CO2 isn't a problem. In the Jurassic, CO2 levels were some 10x today's, where life clearly thrived and delicate aragonite corals evolved in non-acid oceans. Proof of which are those pesky un-dissolved fossils cramming our museum shelves. In the Carboniferous there was up to 20x current CO2 levels and never a runaway greenhouse, ever.
We'll never reach those levels again, except in greehouses where farmers use high CO2 to max plant growth. It works - even in fish tanks!
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@xaoseph
Using the IPCC's bloated figures, to forestall just 1C of warming would require all industry to shut down. No cars, planes, trains, factories or campfires - for 30 years!! Back to the stone age.
Using the correct figures blows that out to some 200 years.
All the while Nature does as she likes while you shiver in your dark, damp cave wondering what went wrong with your little plan. History's warm periods prove prosperity on global scales, but Man and CO2 never caused any of them.
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@xaoseph
I'll leave you and your fellow greenies with this message:
Instead of complaining and blaming oil companies for the world's ills and corruption, prove it. Invent something to fill our planet with boundless energy at little cost to anything, immediately widely disseminate this technology so that you can't blame oil companies for buying your silence and blueprints. Educate yourself on the ocean's 60 year cycle, which is now in a cooling phase and why much of the NH is frozen solid.
MrOllyK 1 year ago
@MrOllyK great comment.
daPlumber702 1 year ago
I will grab this info to write a new article about the global warming hype. Thank you!
Flaviomoy 2 years ago
Actually schwabe, the surface temperatures across the US only went up briefly due to the ban on aircraft flights, meaning there were no contrails reflecting the sun's rays. It returned to "normal" after the ban was lifted.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
It's now a big business.
CrotalusBlues 2 years ago
is the planet not heading for a 26000 year wobble or something like that
pinball281 2 years ago
we are heading for an upgrade from 3rd to 4th dimension,,,
'global warming' is a deception - but that does not excuse the fact we are screwing up the planet..
We need to use alternatives to oil, obtain free energy and we need to ban all plastics.. for starters...
SovereignBeing 2 years ago
Agreed...vip
viper383838 2 years ago 2
this guy is pretty cool but he has the evil eye!!! i hope the guy from tell tale heart doesnt see him
jaredbaseballfan 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If slavery is wrong it is justified by the example of all the world... In all ages, one-half of mankind have been slaves. --- Charles Pinckney to the U.S. Constitutional Convention {1787}
ScientificalnessUSA 2 years ago
Brilliant Lord Monkton! CRU are now exposed, now we can have a real debate on climate!
chickenliam 2 years ago 4
Yea, we can only hope that
Klarreboy 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you haven't already, please check out climategate on youtube. If anything make sure that you question what you are being told. The global temperature has dropped over the last decade. Scientists are fudging the numbers. You don't have to agree, but at check it out.
tempermode 2 years ago
Comment removed
charlienethercoat094 2 years ago
The movie the day after tomorrow has a lot to answer for how stupid are we even if all the ice in the world melted it would not flood anything if it melts it would just replace itself becase its already displacing millions of tons of ocean water being ice if it melted it would just fill the massive hole it will leave in the ocean its already there its not like an extra billion tons of ocean water is going to appear from nowhere
SuperMatt1975 2 years ago
Matt,
It's true that a melting iceberg does not raise the ocean's level, for exactly the reason you mention -- the iceberg displaces water equal to its weight.
However, when land ice (glacier) enters the ocean, then the ocean's level is raised. A rise occurs either if the glacier melts and the water flows to the ocean, or an iceberg calves off the glacier.
While Arctic Ocean ice is floating, both Greenland and Antarctica contain a significant amount of land ice.
MrScientificamerican 2 years ago 4
Latest measure is that 1,500 gigatons of ice perched over the ocean melted into it in the last 10 years, in Greenland. The bad news? 1/4th of this ice melted just in the last YEAR. In Antarctica currently we measure 220 gigatons of LAND ice melting per year, and this amount is increasing by 30 gigatons every year. The GW deniers will tell you than Antarctic SEA ice is increasing. Since its already on the ocean, who cares? This is the most critical issue of GW: its important to get it right.
ubrew12 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - just as Dr. Hans Blix said; But, the Republican media machine didn't want us to hear that.
And, there is NO dangerous climate change caused by human carbon dioxide - just as the "independent scientists" are now trying to tell us! But, the Democrat media machine doesn't want us to hear that.
We are made to run from one boogieman to the next, as each political party achieves its own agendas for themselves & their money mates.
BOB CARTER
weallknowitstrue 2 years ago
If you are here, you are at least interested in this subject. If you believe in global warming OR not, this treaty is BAD FOR AMERICA. Please call the White House and tell Pres O. NOT TO SIGN. Time is running out, & he's still looking for "a comprehensive deal at Copenhagen" per the UK Guardian 11/17. U.S. media hardly even mentions such an important treaty. WHY?
PLEASE call, and get everyone you know to call & tell him NOT TO SIGN!
202 456-1111 Let's save our country!
4DC07Jayla 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
NASA, NOAA, MIT, Harvard, IPCC, University of California, Science Magazine, Nature Magazine, Oxford, Cambridge, The Royal Society all warn of Global Warming.
Solar Irradiance has had no NET increase for 34 years since 1975. We have excellent satellite data to prove it.
Yet, arctic ice and mountain glaciers have shrunk nearly 50% the last 34 years due to Global Warming.
WHY??
Search:
Climate Change: NASA's Eyes on the Earth
YouTube:
Arctic Ice almost gone in 10years
/watch?v=MbyoD9CLn1k
goog2k 2 years ago
Winnipeg Canada could use a little more global warming, Brrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!
Mr5forfighting 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
John McCain is a lesbian, I just know it!
Don't eat till you die and then eat all
you want on the way to the cemetery.
ScientificalnessUSA 2 years ago
Comment removed
OneDollarBook 2 years ago 7
Correction: Bertrand Russell
ScientificalnessUSA 2 years ago
@OneDollarBook
CORRECT !
HolyCatholicApostoli 1 year ago
So you see Canadas boreal cannot be responsible for 90% of world's oxygen.
Siberian boreal is larger than Canadian boreal meaning that if boreal were the sole supplier of oxygen - which it isn't - then canadian would be less than 50%. Think about it. You cannot have a smaller half larger than 49%. (logic NOT science)
Oceans warm - algae dies.
Algae supplies most of our oxygen.
Trees are cut down - oceans warm.
Vicious circle.
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
It is estimated that between 70% and 80% of the oxygen in the atmosphere is produced by marine plants . Nearly all marine plants are single celled, photosynthetic algae.
source - ecologydotcom
phytoplankton produce almost half the oxygen you breathe.
source - NASA
ocean is water
water is h20
if water-splitting occured naturally - & frequently - we'd all explode.
For more info read Graf Zeppelin
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this loser should be shot
jpmorgan187 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Lord Christopher Monckton was an advisor to Margaret Thatcher"
Need I say more?
AresCitadel 2 years ago
What happened to the ice age,predicted in 1970s by scientists,we were supposed to be in?Global warming,"climate change" whatever they are calling now,is just another money racket to control people's lives,to pass insane laws and scare people.Total bullshit-Ive always known it.
OnlyAPawn1970 2 years ago 5
"My Weekly Reader" (the magazine that was passed out among elementary school students) reported on the imminent, unavoidable, upcoming ice-age in 1972.
ScientificalnessUSA 2 years ago 4
@OnlyAPawn1970 George Will, the author of the 1975 Newsweek article you're indirectly referring to, said, "the article summarized the science of the time. Since then, numerous climate-sensing satellites have gone into orbit and theoretical understanding of atmospheric chemistry has improved considerably. I have occasionally thought of publishing an update to the article, but Ive always decided that such an action would garner unwanted notoriety without changing any minds."
Haengma 1 year ago
What I love is that "scientists" tell us that GW is all our fault!
If we read history books or listen to historians they tell us the world has warmed up and cooled down, with evidence available in fossils and such like.
For those "scientists" isnt it just remotely possible that the giant ball of fire at the centre of the solar system(the sun) may be to blame?
NASA have even admitted ALL the planets have increased in temperature.
bfb4ever 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Wikipedia article for Scientific opinion on climate change:
"With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change."
NO REMAINING SCIENTIFIC BODY. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. CERO. Got it???
ThinkTank255 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
GW is SUPPOSED to happen?????
Okay, i give up.
What do i care if mankind chops down all the Congo and Amazon and Siberian Boreal?
What do I care that half the worlds population are about to joins us in this Internal Combustion Madness?
Why should i care that when my children get to my age the planet will be so rancid with smog that they wont be able to breathe.
Go on, give nature a helping hand.
Jesus will love u for it.
Halleh -fucking - lujah.
Im alright Jack-son-ville-US of fuckin A
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
The boreal forest plays a significant role in the earth's environmental balance. Besides being a producer of oxygen, the boreal forest absorbs and stores carbon dioxide and so plays a critical role in mitigating global warming. Canadians cannot forget they are custodian to one third of this essential global resource.
- CNR
All well and good, but if the two-thirds that are not in Canada gets felled - then what?????
Russians are chopping down their Siberian boreal like crazy.
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
70% of our oxygen is produced fr. the ocean.
ScientificalnessUSA 2 years ago
Canada's boreal forest is part of a great northern circumpolar band of mostly coniferous trees extending across the subarctic latitudes of Russia, Scandinavia and North America. Globally, the boreal forest comprises almost 25% of the world's closed canopy forest as well as vast expanses of open transitional forest.
Says who?
CNR - Canadian Natural Resources
So tell me Einstein, where is the other 75%
continued above...
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
EXCELLENT! It's awesome to hear someone standing up and speaking truth! 5stars
0o0oBecky0o0o 2 years ago 7
Scientists have received $100 billion in funding from governments to " prove " the link between climate change and CO2. They have failed totally. AGW is a scam, just follow the money trail - and check out the uninformed comments from the " bed wetters" here on youtube.
Turitea 2 years ago 3
woah.. alot of science nerds lol i didnt even understand half of what he said
Zollaganzi 2 years ago
Do any of you oil fanatics know that
a) rainforest (lungs of the planet) is being destroyed
b) They soak up CO2
c) They release vast amounts of CO2 when felled
d) 27 billions tons of CO2 is released every year
e) This is increasing the temp of oceans
f) Warm oceans DONTabsorb CO2
g) Because of this your piddly percentages will grow exponentially
The question is about how little imps grow into big devils. If we dont curtail the imp then were storing up a lot of future trouble.
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
this entire video is explaining that everything you just said is all hearsay. The amount of CO2 we produce annually doesn't even come close to the amount of CO2 a volcano releases during an eruption. The other problem with global warming is that it's SUPPOSED to happen. The ice age was caused when meteor hit the earth all blacked out the sun. The planet still has winter BECAUSE of that meteor. Did you also know that the ozone has not only been repairing itself, but getting thicker?
spiderweb20 2 years ago 2
Okay.
PROVE TO ME that trees are being replaced quicker than they are being chopped down.
A simple puzzle:
I have ten beans. I take 2 away and put one back. I take another 2 away and put one back.
How long before you dismantle the lungs of the planet & then tell me that this will have no effect on the planet?
If you dont want ad hominem then start using your brains.
Try cleaning without a cloth and youll find that the shit stays on the surface.
Trees r the cloth!
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
90% of the oxygen that we need for the entire earth is produced by the by the Boreal forest in Canada. We (Canada) aren't chopping it down. It's preserved and will remain that way because we know we need it to survive. Trees being cut down anywhere else, to the degree we're chopping them down, isn't effecting us one bit.
spiderweb20 2 years ago
Not true.
ScientificalnessUSA 2 years ago
The part part of your comment is all the proofs you give. Seriously, look it up. Canada's Boreal Forest is responsible for cleaning the earths air at an extremely fast rate.
spiderweb20 2 years ago
Ad hominem eh?
Okay here goes -
Monckton is listed as a "Global Warming" expert for the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based freemarket think tank.
The Heartland Institute frequently attacks the scientific evidence for human-caused climate change. The Heartland Institute has received over $791,000 from oil-giant ExxonMobil since 1998.
Note the lack of ad hominem or any other phrase used to condescend
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
Do any of you global warming fanatics know how what percentage CO2 is of our atmosphere?
2%
Now how much of that CO2 is man made?
.03%
What is by far the largest green house gas?
Water Vapour.
Not many chevies burning water out there.
Please do a little reading for yourself. Don't believe me a "denier" but don't buy Al Gore's fictional story either.
rich7831 2 years ago 3
From Wikipedia
CO2 is a trace gas being only 0.0383% of the atmosphere.
WinstonSmithsBrain 2 years ago 3
I watched 2 minutes before I puked
Lord Christopher WHO?
Oh yeah, yet another git who wants to us 2believe that there's a green conspiracy that wants to put paid to the oil conspiracy that rednecks fail 2 acknowledge because according to Genesis 'on the third day God gave us oil to pollute and said, "go choppest down thou trees so thou can evolve into CO2 breathing three-legged plants to compensate."
Yep... another Corporate prick who prefers the good life so long as we dont get ours.
ProphetOfSpoon 2 years ago
I like the way you address his arguments and stay away from personal ad hominem bullshit.
Sigh the level of intellect around here is just astounding.
But of course the skeptics are funded by "Big Oil" , our side? NEVER why its not like Gore has $2 Billion invested in green startups rights?
Pathetic.
mctarmac10 2 years ago
why listen to this guy about tainted stats on ice loss in green land? why not ask somone who actually lives there, or the people who live in north west terratories in canada who see lakes bubbling with mathane gas with the absence of the perma frost
MrYpres 2 years ago
Even if global warming is not caused by co2 emmisions.... for fuck sakes it is responsible for thousands of smog related deaths ( I had to move out of my beloved Toronto cuz I couldn't breath properly anymore) and we are running out of oil anyway and need to replace it, So if we battle our co2 emmisions we will have an oil replacement before it is total crisis, smog will be less, acid rain will be less..... so to argue against global warming is mute.
oxjr 2 years ago
Everytime I argue with an anthropogenic global warming believer, the bring up 'ice core samples'. I don't know how to respond to this?
toecutterr6 2 years ago
you say, i stand corrected
MrYpres 2 years ago
Why, because you say so? Is it a stand alone way to quantify the warming of the earth? The martian ice cap is evaporating at a similar rate as earth's glaciers...Do we take ice core samples from there?
toecutterr6 2 years ago
they take ice samples from green land and antartic, and it isnt just me who says so, the lakes in the nwt are in fact bubbling with mathane
MrYpres 2 years ago
i replied to the wrong message,
the ice drilled in the antartic and green land had trapped air for hunderds of thousands of years which scientest analize, there has never been as much co2 in the atmosphere as of now,
MrYpres 2 years ago
Monckton has proven he is not a scientist the moment he mentioned Mars and Jupiter. He infers that solar activity is causing global warming on other planets when the TSI has been unchanged for over 30 years.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
Brilliant !
pasoundman 2 years ago 2
nikkinomad -
Forgot to say: I love Muppets.
Especially Kermit - you know, the GREEN one !
In the meantime, please keep the parodies flowing: the crumbling Alarmist Empire needs ALL the moral support it can muster (and it's not at all fussy about WHO provides it).
marvinc999 2 years ago
K i'm new to this thought i'd replied to individuals comments not the just the video... so excuse the fact that them all being put together here makes me look like a random ranter! lol!
nikkinomad 2 years ago
nikkinomad -
So Monckton's a Muppet ? Thanks for sharing that with us - together with your lucid exposition of Climate Science !
From now on, I'm ignoring EVERYTHING written and said by (inter alios): Singer, Landsea, Spencer, Morner, Tennekes, Reiter, Akosofu, Zichichi, Jaworowski, Idso, and all the other muppets.
And that includes Mother Earth, too: she seems NOT to be li