Added: 3 years ago
From: UCtelevision
Views: 10,969
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (564)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Massive Cold Blast Coming To Eastern Europe And Asia. (-10C anomaly from all that trapped Arctic heat).

    Korea Has Heaviest Snow In A Century, Coldest Weather In 50 Years.

    Algeria under snow. 1:39 in. youtube: T2g7h8ty7wM

    Hottest Year Ever : Cold Wave Spreads To China (-22C)

    January 9, 2012: Treacherous sea ice delays fuel delivery to Nome, Alaska Formidable ice up to 4 feet thick. News: "

    Jan 09, 2012 Arctic sea ice as winter clamps down, our polar ice cap dwindles (AlaskaDispatch)

    Hahaha

  • "Much of Russia, Asia and North Africa is also 5-15C below normal. Rest assured, Hansen will not be talking about this." (NOAA)

    "Speaking from one of his smaller homes in Santa Barbara, California Al Gore asks you give up your car for the good of the planet."

    Alps: snowiest January in 30 or even 60 years.

    Southern ice is anomaly, +410,000Km^2.

    AMSU Sat. records -1C over two years.

    Heavy Snow In Oregon “a sure sign of global warming.”

    NASA : Arctic To Be Ice Free In Nine Months. (Dec 12 2007)

  • "Global temperatures are plummeting, and the temperature recorded by AMSU satellite of 251.858K on January 19 2012 was the coldest of any day since at least 2002"

    "Alaska may be frozen solid and buried in snow, but the real conditions are those that lie inside computer models. Everything you see in the real world is just an illusion"

    "Pachauri Freezing His अंडकोष Off. India is basking in record lows.

    "Gore, Hansen, Trenberth going Antarctica to highlight GW, where temps are 5-15C below norm."

  • RE-releasing trapped CO2 back into the atmosphere is mans greatest gift to nature.

    It was higher in the past, up to 18x higher than now. What was the damage to the lush early Earth apart from none.

  • @m1aws Yeah but what will the damage be to us...?

  • @christhemountain Lets go off the statistics. More CO2 means more crops, more rain, better overall weather, less life and home threatening weather etc. etc.

    On the other hand, the world monetary system wants to charge you big dollars on a huge Ponzi scheme for the use of fuel so when poor people cannot meet the cost, they will die of cold and hunger.

  • @m1aws

    You say "lets go off the statistics" then don't show me any. Human beings have adapted to a certain climate. Changing that climate will not be good. Rising sea levels will not be good. Crops will likely not benefit.... as rain patterns change, heat causes soil moisture to decrease, wildfires increase. Furthermore if plants do benefits, they'll be more weeds too and more need for fertilisers. Plants need water and CO2 in the right amounts... changing that balance is not good for them.

  • @christhemountain What planet are you from?

    CO2 is what plants need to breathe. Natural fertiliser. Especially crops. Stop crying about weeds. If you are starving, weeds will be your staple diet.

    The sea's are dropping.

    Rains have increased, heavy storms etc. are down.

    Wildfires are mostly man made, or natural.

    The Sahel is greening again. Australia has become lush once more.

    This last century has seen an undisputed 1C rise in 100 years. The most stable century known to man.

  • @m1aws

    Please show me the evidence that "the seas are dropping". Thanks.

  • @christhemountain Are you so young I must hold your hand when looking on the internet?

    Just go into Google images and type in "global sea levels dropping". You'll see the past 2-3 years have seen an unexplainable, undeniable, inexcusable decline of 6mm a year.

  • @m1aws

    All those graphs show clear up and down, but an overall trend of up. What leads you to believe that such a short term trend is a better indicator of the future than the long term history?

  • @christhemountain The past three year trend is down! Down sharply at that.

    What leads you to see otherwise. What leads to to think sea levels alter on a trend when nobody can find a driver or a good guess for it.

    The mesosphere is also contracting. The Solar output has been dropping over this last three decades and going lower.

    Someone has turned off the kettle. The water is not fizzing gasses as much now

    CO2 is the symptom of global warming. Never been the driver (Vostock).

  • @m1aws

    Yes the trend it down - but you speak with such certainty and I'm always suspicious of such certainty. Maybe sea level will decrease, maybe not, but to be so sure is strange. I suspect you know full well that the relationship between CO2 is more complicated than that. Warming increases the level of CO2, which in turn increases warming.

  • @christhemountain I'm always derisory to "scientists" who speak of what they do not understand but go along because the money is there.

    CO2 effects are fully ascertained. It's effects are logarithmic. 50% absorption within its bands is at 60ppm. Reality, water vapour covers most of its bands.

    Adding more CO2 does next to nothing. Venus is proof.

    9,000 PhD's did not sign simply because they can. Sounds like Jones, Ignore the lying idiot.

  • @m1aws

    And what of every scientific body of national or international standing that supports the notion that AGW is real? Who are you to say better than every one of them?

  • @christhemountain Unlike so many IPCC "scientists" I am not paid to find nor motivated by money. I also have the weight of truth on my side. I don't like backing losers.

    There are not that many pro-AGW "scientists" like I said before. You have Marxist teachers who set your life by instruction, not education. Question everything. Watch the money flow.

    There is not one peer reviewed paper that proves conclusively AGW exists. Period. Note its a presumption. I've looked soo hard.

    Fair enough?

  • @m1aws

    I'm not talking IPCC. I'm talking National Academy of Sciences. I'm talking Royal Society. And many many others. Are they all corrupt?

  • @christhemountain Guess who pays them. Yes, their payee's want a global tax on energy.

  • @m1aws

    So ALL the scientific academies and their scientists are corrupt. Because they are paid by governments which have been resisting action for decades! So many failed climate talks by all these governments which want taxes?

    On the other hand, those that are funded by Exxon are utterly unbiased!

    I'm sorry to ask you this, but, Evolution: Fact or fiction?

  • @christhemountain Governments welcome a global tax on fuels. Was it not lead by lying Al Gore? They also resisted "eco" and "green" until they saw money can be made from it.

    If Exxon wish to give me money, I'm sure they can find me.

    This gives an insight to your errors: /watch?v=YaTJJCPYhlk

    If I was God? Evolution. Demean God; go for creation.

  • @m1aws

    You obviously have a deep distrust of government and science. You dodge my Exxon question and seem to doubt evolution. You ignore strong resistance from governments on taxing pollutants. You ignore the motivation of scientists to overturn the consensus and make their name. You see that consensus, but dismiss it in an instance. Above all, anyone who disagrees with you must be either Marxist, corrupt or stupid.

  • @christhemountain Exxon is a small player against any gov't. Even G.W.Bu$h backs AGW now. Get over it.

    I believe evolution.

    You simply have not seen the video I pointed to you. Everything you have argued about is clearly shown and proven. Watch it all. Not because its believable but it covers and disproves all the points you have been lied about. /watch?v=YaTJJCPYhlk

  • @m1aws Ah yes, the Channel 4 documentary. I could tell you to google "real climate swindled" but I know you'll just tell me the people that write that site are corrupt anyway.

    Strange that you believe evolution, I mean surely the evolutionists have vested interest to say its true?

  • @christhemountain So you are saying all those contributors are liars. You?

    9K against 77. Yet you say you follow "scientific con-census"?

    Pity you never listened to a word they said in this film yet they were in the middle of the big lie and came out. They tell you where and why the money was "put on the table". Everything. You are taken in by simple propaganda no more.

    I guess you think the Earth is 4k yrs old and you want to demean God? ok, good for you. You die, You fry.

  • @m1aws Why bring up 9k vs 77 when you don't trust scientists anyway?

  • @christhemountain Because if 78 are right and at that time no back-hand money to sign, then that is your consensus you say you follow.

    Over 30K in total signed but "only" 9K are PhD's. do you think for one minute they are all wrong against the so-called 77?

    There has been no GW for a decade while CO2 is still going up year on year. It's not a GW gas at these levels. The Suns o/p is dropping at its maximum! The sea's are dropping. The Arctic is back to 5yr nominal levels of ice. Get over it.

  • @m1aws Those 9k are not climate scientists. Wikipedia has an article on "List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming". You'll see its somewhat smaller than 9k.

  • @christhemountain Neither are the 77 (less now) that were in the IPCC. What's your point?

    You did not listen to the video. I'm talking to the uneducated, merely instructed, still arguing for the flat Earth 'cos teacher said so.

    Climatology, Geology, Astrophysics, chemistry, Sea floor surveys etc. etc. Are all in the same boat here. Youtube is packed full of video making PhD's who speak against AGW citing hard, inarguable, facts.

    More than the 70'odd banksters who argue for AGW. (Unprovable).

  • @m1aws

    YOUTUBE? Seriously? Yeah.. I'm the flat earther for saying scientists are right. How is it you don't see it... YOU are the flat earther! You are the "tobacco doesn't cause cancer" guy! In fact.. the people spouting anti agw nonsense are largely the SAME people that went on about cigarettes being safe. And by the way... scientists think AGW is real... Google "PNAS expert credibility in climate change".

  • @christhemountain Now you are mixing facts up and resorting to slander. You have proved yourself to be completely witless on countering the facts.

    A bit about me. "eco" as hell. My home is mainly Solar water/space heated. I'm into electric vehicles. Ex aerospace engineer, done the "science". Always agreed with GW. AGW at one point until I checked the science. Libertarian biker and do not believe in middle men stealing nugatory taxes or imposing laws. Want to smoke? Go die :)

  • @m1aw Yeah, except people were not told to go die, they were told they'd be fine. Libertarian, right that explains it. Taxes = bad. Gotcha.

  • @christhemountain Smoking is a brillant example of the AGW lie. In the USA there was an advert stating that (sic) 100,000 dentists say smoking is good for your teeth. Same with fluoride and same with man made global warming. follow the money tree.

    Under law, where Libertarians live, any man harmed by another, through lies etc. has to pay the damages. You don't have this, you have a cross Fascio-Marxist Government.

  • @m1aws Cigarette lobies existed in past decades to push against all medical evidence that cigarettes were very harmful. Can you guess how long it took for honest scientists to convince the public about cigarettes?

    Fluorides in the correct amounts can harden teeth enamel, making them far more resistant to decay. But I guess you like the idea of having the liberty of going to the dentist more often.

    There is more evidence supporting GW than germ theory. Your move.

  • @OfficeThug Where is the statistical proof Sodium Fluoride hardens teeth.

    Anyone with fluorosis has harder teeth. They are brown, peanut coloured and crack because of embrittlement. People with fluorosis in their bones suffer many maladies. All of them horrible and extremely painful. You have absorbed Fluoride in your teeth when you show flecks in the enamel. 5 parts per billion is the world accepted safe amount.

    Follow the money. Scientists are whores.

    Past decade: NO WARMING!

  • @m1aws Chemistry: Ca5(PO4)3OH (tooth enamel) + F- --> Ca5(PO4)3F + OH-

    The product, fluoroapatite, is far more resistant to chemical attack especially in acidic media like your mouth, with etching leading to bacterial infections. Toothpaste fluorides contain enough fluoride to drive the above reaction to near completion. Drinking water levels are just enough to keep fluoride in your saliva to ensure the above reaction remains product favored.

    Remember to brush your teeth.

  • @m1aws Your disrespect for the scientific process is, I find, extremely distateful considering it is the foundation on which you have enjoyed all the technology we have now. But no, for you, there's nothing good in life, everyone's evil and out to get you except yourself.

    What a bleak fucking world you must live in. Keep dreaming on while we practitioners keep solving the big questions. Just don't blame us when you refuse our solutions and die out.

  • @OfficeThug There is no biological process to naturally infuse fluoride into teeth. I've been an an aerospace engineer all my life and used to think it was a good idea for fluoride due to it being one mole scale harder than calcium. Whats the point when same concentrations cause more bodily harm elsewhere. you ignore the whole body of the facts and you say I ignore the science!!

    Hitler used fluoride in his "work camps". Stalin used it on his people. It's used today.

  • @m1aws It is not a biological process. Chemical process. Pay attention.

    Elemental fluorine is a gas that will kill you very rapidly, that's what Hitler and Stalin used. Sodium fluoride is a salt that needs to be ingested in relatively high doses to kill you (5-10g). The amounts in drinking water are under 1.0 mg per liter. Most groundwater supplies already contain a fluoride concentration close to that, with some places exceeding it. Fluoride compounds are typically minerals, after all.

  • @m1aws By the way, the 50/50 lethal dose of water is 90-100g consumed per kg of bodyweight. The average person would need to drink in excess of 7 kilograms of water, or 7 liters, to run a 50% chance of dying. For fluoride, you'd need to drink 5000-10000 liters at 1.0mg concentrations to die of that. Fluorides also have a short biological half life (under a day) and are very quickly removed through urination

    The water is more dangerous than its fluoride content. Why are we drinking water?

  • @OfficeThug You are not listening which is understandable considering you are changing the core of the discussion because AGW is a flimsy theory who's "tipping point" has been proven a bad fallacy over this past decade of cooling.

    Time to learn something about the Sun my man! Stop assuming its all about warming the air because that would cool the oceans and filter those frequencies from the land.

    UN said 5ppb sodium fluoride. get over it.

    Biology IS chemistry!

  • @m1aws Funny, the UN never made any claims about water fluoridation. Try the World Health Organization, which quotes 0.5-1.0 ppt concentrations as recommended.

    Also, the AGW tipping point is the melting of arctic permafrosts which will break the heat and pressure sensitive methane clathrates, releasing the potent greenhouse gas into the atmosphere and causing a runaway effect. This exact scenario is currently occuring, there's evidence that ties it to mass marine extinction events.

  • @OfficeThug I suggest you read back to what set you off. I also suggest you look at the dosage in ordinary toothpaste plus other sources.

    The Arctic permafrost regions are doing fine, thank you for your concern but I suggest you read up on permafrosts in geology. many times the Arctic has disappeared and many times the permafrosts have gone. Get over it. Please supply evidence to mass extinction events.

  • @m1aws There is strong evidence to support a Clathrate Gun Scenario has occured several times in the past and led to mass extinctions, particularly for aquatic life. The Permian–Triassic extinction event's 96% oceanic extinction rate is believed to be very strongly tied to such a scenario. See palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/Benton/r­eprints/2003TREEPTr.pdf

  • @m1aws In addition, I know how much fluoride is present per gram of toothpaste because it says the amount right there on the toothpaste barrel. It's around 230 mg per gram. I also have good reason to trust those amounts given I've done direct potentiometric analyses of fluoride content in commercial toothpaste before. But you aren't swallowing it (I hope?) so you're fine. Given the biological half-life of fluoride is very short (it doesn't accumulate) even if you did swallow you'd be fine

  • @OfficeThug Once again you are not looking at the historical perspective. Only 5M yr ago there were centennial fluctuations of over 15C. Makes our 1C (Taken off the 1900 low) seem like a piddle puddle emptying into the deep blue sea.

    Note the present day climate. It's all dropping so your theory will have to wait for another millennium.

  • @m1aws Don't know where you're pulling your data, probably some denier camp.

    agu.org/pubs/crossref/2010/201­0GL043717.shtml

    Essentially, the random fluctuations (which are predicatble through modelling) we'd expect presently do not account for what we are observing, which is increasing atmospheric energy correlated with rapid rise of CO2 levels in the atmosphere. CO2 has been tied to heightened global temperatures, particularly in ice cores.

  • @OfficeThug I used Google for the consensus of facts. You picked a very lonely subject. It's you who is in denial. The only two major outflows of methane are one volcano in Chile and the Caspian sea.

    What increasing atmospheric energy? The USA hasn't even had a big storm since 2005. How can warming the thin low density air warm the sea instead because its supposedly getting warmer but the troposphere is getting colder the the mesosphere is collapsing!?

    Its you who's in denial!

  • @m1aws There were 1,897 tornadoes reported in the US in 2011 (of which at least 1,664 were confirmed). 2011 was an exceptionally destructive and deadly year for tornadoes; worldwide, at least 576 people perished due to tornadoes: 12 in Bangladesh, two in South Africa, one in New Zealand, one in the Philippines, one in Russia, one in Canada and an estimated 552 in the United States (compared to 564 US deaths in the prior ten years combined).

  • @m1aws No major storms, and you had the one of the worst tornado seasons in recorded history. Your "concensus of facts" is completely meaningless. Give me peer-reviewed sources or go home. Heck, even wikipedia is good enough at this point, that's where I got that tornado season quote.

  • @OfficeThug We also count more Sunspots because we have satellites for that too. I'm not talking about weedly piddly storms. 2005 was the last in the USA. The 1930's and '50s dustbowl is over. The West is not a desert anymore.

    <600 ppl dead from a storm is no storm. Get a grip youngster!

    Real-science. com is full of old papers showing thousands killed.

    Your sort keep whinging global cooling is the new warming now. Anchorage has just hit a new record low. Alaska was breaking record lows too.

  • @m1aws Hey, whats this with Hansen adjusting all the historical temperature data used on GISS. Just because the old temps don't suit his psychosis does not mean he is God and can ordain all the old numbers into the dustbin. Does he really think nobody could measure temperature before his time?

    What a sick fukkk!

  • @m1aws No, I'm not talking about some shitty blog that butchers the hard work of other researchers.

    Try nature.com

  • @OfficeThug nature.com is run by bankster Adam Horwitz. Try someone that does not distort and butcher other peoples hard work like Hansen "hide the decline" does.

  • @m1aws You claimed a few comments back that you were a rocket scientist and now you're litterally dismissing the most cited scientific journal in the world?

    Are you completely daft or just stupid?

  • @OfficeThug Durban spoke nothing of science. Nature com, Pachauri, "Progressives", Bernanki et all are all banksters. Your "scientists" are Gov't money whores. It's the "new dole". The pawns on the Gov't chessboard. The front line propagandists like Jones, Mann, Hansen etc. They KNOW they are lying hence Hansens adjustments of old data.

    At least my work record has been perfect. No lies, obfuscations jerry rigging excuses, political talk, propagandising etc. etc.

    You're a joke.

  • @m1aws There is no excuse for dismissing Nature. You are basically anti-science for doing that on any level. But you're libertarian so I guess that's to be expected. Just stay the hell out of society if you don't like it ok?

  • @OfficeThug YOU are anti-science, anti-nature and anti-common sense. From your last post you have also proved yourself to be anti-realist. How many times does one have to repeat the obvious. GW has ended on a ten year glitch with no "tipping point". Every pointer to GW has ended, game over. After all that, AGW has NEVER BEEN PROVED.

    Your masters all suffer from greed, psychosis, stupidity and an inability to even lie straight in bed with an undying hatred of their fellow human beings. Like you.

  • @OfficeThug Try googling

    "New Research: Fluoride Linked to #1 Cause of Death".

    Even if it is only 1% true. I win.

  • @christhemountain As goes corruption. Its hard to get science funding unless it fits the political colours of the day.

  • @m1aws And the political colours are deeply sceptical of AGW! Even Durban has been called an abject failure by people such as James Delingpole. Why? Because governments don't want it!

  • @christhemountain This one is scary!

    ht tp weeklyintercept blogspot com/2011/11/northern-hemispher­e-sea-level-falling html

    It follows on with the collapsing mesosphere which is impossible if CO2 is heating it up.

    May we look at the Solar data? OMG !!! Thats been going down over consecutive 11 yr cycles! Oh no! WE ARE DOOMED!

  • @m1aws

    Are you a scientist? No. So who do you rely on for your conclusions? Scientists, I'm guessing. But which ones? Ones selected on the basis of whether they agree with you or not. Bravo. I, on the other hand, go on the scientific consensus, as I do with every scientific issue.

  • @christhemountain No, engineer, retired.

    The IPCC lead team: Pachauri: Indian bankster and director for TATA research. He's a railway engineer.

    Deluded michael Mann.

    Labourite Chris Jones also a money grubber.

    Wang - proven to be not telling the truth.

    Hansen, a terrorist and psychotic.

    There has been 77 PhD's FOR AGW in the IPCC scam but 9,000 PhD's who argue the fact its a crock.

  • @m1aws

    Please reconcile the 77PhDs and the 9,000 PhDs with the first paragraph of the wiki article called "Scientific opinion on Climate Change", which states "No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion" on the issue of AGW.

  • WATCH THIS PEOPLE /watch?v=gV9A2IGShuk WAKE UP GIVE THE GLOBALISTS HELL AND DONT THINK THEY LOVE PUSHING MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE MYTH JUST TO SUCK UP MORE TAX AND A FURTHER ADVANTAGE TO THEIR AGENDA OF A WORLD GOVERNMENT

  • The gases emitted from cars MAY thicken the atmosphere which MAY trap in heat which MAY melt the ice a bit which MAY raise the sea level a bit which MAY destroy us all.

    If I eat a slice of pie I MAY not like it and MAY spit it out and an ant MAY eat it which MAY get ants everywhere hooked on pie which MAY cause a global catastrophe in which ants dominate humans and work them as slaves for more pie.

    Slightly exaggerated, but the point is there.

  • @ThePannhead

    CO2 IS emitted from cars, power stations and other sources (duh).

    CO2 concentration IS rising (direct measurement - Keeling et al, indirect measurement - ice cores).

    CO2 DOES trap solar energy, warming as a result (a high school experiment).

    Warmer atmosphere INCREASES the melting of ice sheets (duh).

    Melting ice sheets cause rise in sea level (high school physics).

    Which of the above steps is unclear ?

  • @ToothbrushMan Yes for the most part, but it's not all directly related. Humans are a relatively minor producer of CO2 when you look at the tons and tons released from underneath oceans and volcanic activity, which are both natural and happening all the time. The oceans alone have been shown to contribute 80% of emissions. Trend charts show over the past years that as heat increases, then CO2 increases shortly afterward (I wont pretend to know why) so there is a relationship, its just backwards.

  • @ThePannhead

    Looking up the USGS website "Volcanic Gases and Climate Change Overview" and the link to the American Geophysical Union's EOS article "Volcanic Versus Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide", it states that human emissions of CO2 are about 35 Gt per year, whereas "degassing subaerial and submarine volcanoes" are in the range 130 Mt - 440 Mt per year - about 0.3 to 1.2 % of human output.

  • @ThePannhead

    Oceans emit about 330 Gt per year but also reabsorb very nearly the same amount. Simple chemistry states that the CO2 concentrations in the oceans and atmosphere must be in close equilibrium. This is seen in the slight rise in ocean acidity as ocean CO2 concentration keep pace with atmospheric CO2 concentration.

  • @ThePannhead

    Finally, CO2 concentrations lag temperature rises because the CO2 did not start the warming in the first place. Whatever did start the initial warming (wobbles in Earths orbit) caused an initial warming of the oceans, which released CO2 (warmer water holds less dissolved gas than cold water). The rise in CO2 amplified the initial warming effect via the greenhouse effect - causing a runaway positive feedback - CO2 concentrations peaked 400-1000 years after the initial warming.

  • From journal Nature Geoscience:

    .

    Warming ocean could melt ice faster than thought

    .

    Warming air from climate change isn't the only thing that will speed ice melting near the poles - so will the warming water beneath the ice, a new study points out.

    Increased melting of ice in Greenland and parts of Antarctica has been reported as a consequence of global warming, potentially raising sea levels.

    But little attention has been paid to the impact of warmer water beneath the ice (AP July 3, 2011).

  • @phantomscolts2

    so you're saying that the EPA is assisting companies to gain monopoly on the market by regulating out any opposition?

  • @phantomscolts2

    so how did the USA government turn the EPA in a money spinner, when over here is costs the ozzie government money?

  • @phantomscolts2

    here in australia, our EPA runs a little bit differently to in USA. i recently re-register my car. i took it to my mechanic who passed the car and did all the paperwork with the main roads dept. most of the cost of rego was for the mechanic, not for the main roads dept. if you want to do a big development etc, you hire an expert consultant to do your environmental report and they negotiate with the EPA. the winner again, is the consultant.

  • @phantomscolts2 hmmm, just yelling (OR PUTTING IN CAPITALS) something doesn't make it true. it means you like yelling, that's all. plenty of companies are making massive profits by keeping things "fixed" as is. how do you make money from this "panic" as you call it? i'd like to know. i want to get in on the "game" so i can make some "profit".

  • phantomscolts2 - speaking of huge money maker for big government and corportate industry. all top 14 largest corporate profits in a quarter in history are all oil companies and all within the last 5 years. don't you think they would have billions of reasons to want to keep things the same? how does a government make money out of climate change?

  • The 2010 meteorological year, which ended on 30 November, was the warmest in NASA’s 130-year record, data posted by the agency today shows. Over the oceans as well as on land, the average global temperature for the 12-month period that began last December was 14.65˚C.

    The 2010 meteorological year was slightly warmer than the previous warmest year, the 2005 calendar year, when the average temperature was 14.53˚C.

    --ScienceMag 12/10/10

    BTW, Global Warming evaporates more water & makes MORE SNOW

  • @phantomscolts2 LOL!!!

    Blah, blah, blah . . .

    Pathetic.

  • @phantomscolts2 LOL!!!

    JEEZ, you gotta send out some emails right away to the MELTING Arctic sea ice, MELTING Siberian permafrost, MELTING glaciers, and MELTING Antarctic.

    They still haven't got your memo that Global Warming is all a conspiracy.

    Oh!, BTW, you've also gotta tell the plants, animals, and insects migrating north.

    Duhh???

    Pathetic.

  • @phantomscolts2  Blah, blah, blah.

    LOL!!!

  • @phantomscolts2 YOU'RE RIGHT!

    The temperature figures are faked and the WeatherChannel, NASA, NOAA, MIT, Univ.of Calif., Harvard, Cambridge, the American Geophysical Union, The Royal Society, Union of Concerned Scientists are all part of the conspiracy.

    Except no one told the disappearing arctic ice, melting mountain glaciers, early springs, and the plants, animals, and insects all migrating north.

    Oops?

    See the WeatherChannel YouTube:

    Global Warming - Cool Summer WHY??/watch?v=sX6jEsnGcrA

  • @phantomscolts2 LOL!!!

    You're the only one right now who looks like a Wacko cultist spamming this scientific academic site.

    Have you ever heard of "projection?"

    Duhh???

  • The National Academy of Sciences found:

    (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the IPCC.

    (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

    For a comprehensive, detailed, worldwide listing, search: "Scientific opinion on climate change"

  • @phantomscolts2 Maybe you should go teach at MIT, UCSD, Harvard, Oxford, or Cambridge? Duhh???

    MIT News 5/19/09

    MIT Research published in the American Meteorological Society's JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, predicts a median probability that worldwide surface temperatures will RISE 5.2 degrees Celsius (9.3F) by the year 2100.

    See the WeatherChannel YouTube:

    Global Warming - Cool Summer WHY??

    /watch?v=sX6jEsnGcrA

    New Study: Melting Arctic Ice almost gone in 10 years.

    /watch?v=MbyoD9CLn1k

  • @phantomscolts2 Thank you for being so clear about your wacko ideas.

    I guess we should all have "complete freedom" to destroy the earth however we wish? Duhh???

    What an utter idiot. (Probably a Tea Party/Republican too.)

  • @phantomscolts2 Erh, ok??? You really seem to have your shit together so to speak...

  • @phantomscolts2 Most of the time UN-organs like the SC can't make any decisions at all because all the original members has a veto right, but to hell with the facts. They are trying to take over the world. In fact they are so ingenious that they pretend to be in disagreement when they actually had the plan set out right from the start. That evil, evil organization. And the jews are actually behind this evil endeavour aren't they? Geez... the only one ruled by fear seems to be YOU!

  • Nice try, Nighverssion, but your technique to discredit the environmental movement fighting anthropogenic global warming (AGW) by using poor grammar and calling the opposing side racist won't work. You're just a dumb clone of "Nightversionn".

  • Climate change in the news…MSNBC

    DENIARS ARE RASIS!! It has been proven over and over again. Just look at the people who keep denying global warming and climate change? There always rich wite rasists who hate the president because A BLACK MAN IS IN THE WITE HOWSE. It gets old. And these people vote? They decide if the world is going to be fixed or not? Evil rasists who cant understand SIENCE. They need jail so we can stop them from destroying the earth.

  • @Nightverssion I think you are very well informed and have a way with words to get the message across to us deniers, please speak to us about your Prophet Al Gore, and his warning of the dangers of man made CO2, and that if we don't repent, the world will get hotter and hotter until if becomes Hell on earth! Thank-you for converting me, I have given up my 4 by 4 truck and walking to work! :)

  • With sensors placed over heat vents and asphalt driveways it makes it look even worse. Not to mention the discovery of the fudged data used.

  • wth is that ? Those people really seems to do anything they are paid for even acting like smart people becausse they gather data . Well I have news for them your a really usefull tool of the so called elite , and your a copy of the wished result of the public education system wish is no more then a cell ... Wellcome into the matrix of luciferian doctrine .

  • @eshnajizzle Sorry dude.

    This has absolutely nothing to do with the national debt.

    Try another ridiculous Neo-Con canard

  • Comment removed

  • Rockefeller said that Oil was planned before Electricity

  • We can get off most fossil fuels within 20-30 years if we put a concerted effort into solar, wind, fuel cells, electric cars, algae biofuels, and new nuclear technologies.

    We also need a new national smart power grid to move electricity.

    We can use a carbon tax on fossil fuels to pay for it, and it'll provide millions of JOBS that can't be exported.

    Europe & China are ALREADY doing this and America will lose out in future green energy technologies, if we don't.

    We owe it to our grandchildren.

  • @goog2k Sure if you get rid of the BIG 13. End the Eye

  • @goog2k

    And, ironically, it would probably cost less than the US national debt at the moment.. =)

    If only the debt had been used for something useful!!

  • @goog2k Deniars ARE RASIST That is all there is too it bcuz dey know da erf be floodin but dey deny it! DOse RASISTS like Crush BIMBO do know wut dey be talkin bout! Da Islands iz gone make milians of peeple lose der land becuzz dey iz sinking and gone be flooding!

  • @Nightverssion Dont whatch too mutch tv ... 

  • @Niightversionn .. the government investment and support of solar & wind energy technologies & electric cars instead of the massive tax-sucking big oil-nuclear-coal industry welfare by that terrorist Reagan (and later Bush, Clinton, Bush & now Obama)?

  • @Niightversionn Why don't you stop with the IRRELEVANT BULLSHIT FUCK (either true irrelevant shit such as what labels & categories certain universities place climatology, or endless cock-sucking paranoid delusional theories about "Al Gore will make billions in blah blah blah") and even ADDRESS what the FUCK is important: massive economic depression & poverty & wars fighting over the last drop of oil & society-up-ending climate changes all because fuckhead CONSERVATIVES like you opposed ...

  • Notice how the AGW-deniers DO NOT HAVE A SINGLE THING TO SAY ABOUT THIS VIDEO! They react and respond only to other YouTubers' comments or spew their own shit. They have NOTHING to say against Guillermo Auad. They KNOW they are done. Finished! Their lies have destroyed and hurt the United States and the planet and the economy for too long.

  • FOrcasting the CLimate is much harder then forcasting the Weather...cause you are guessing the Weather for thousands of years that make "Climate Change Possiblle

    Meterologists can maybye get the next day right, or 3 days out rigt but 7 to 10 days out is hit or miss

    The "Experts" studying "Climate Change have been wrong since 1929 with ther Global warming "Armegedon Predictions and And even IPCC is up to 5 revisions with all their "oopsies" ommited, corrected,and "brushed under the carpet"

  • We can get off most fossil fuels within 20-30 years if we put a concerted effort into solar, wind, fuel cells, electric cars, algae biofuels, and new nuclear technologies.

    We also need a new national smart power grid to move electricity.

    We can use a carbon tax on fossil fuels to pay for it, and it'll provide millions of JOBS that can't be exported.

    Europe & China are ALREADY doing this and America will lose out in future green energy technologies, if we don't.

    We owe it to our grandchildren.

  • We make over 90 million tons CO2 each DAY.

    Atmospheric CO2 is rising 2ppm per year (0.5%), TWICE that of 50 years ago.

    CO2 levels are 37% above the highest levels for 650,000 years.

    Dissolved CO2 makes acid.

    Ocean pH has already dropped from 8.2 to 8.1 and H+ ion is up over 25%

    In 25 years CO2 will reach 450ppm which most oceanographers warn will interfere with growth of calcium carbonate forming plankton and corals.

    They make the base of the ocean's food chain

    Search: Trends in Carbon Dioxide

  • WHAT COOLING?

    April = 2nd WARMEST April in the UAH 32 year satellite record.

    March = HOTTEST March in UAH records of Global Temperatures.

    (UAH - Univ. of Alabama, Huntsville is run by Dr. John Christy, well known AGW skeptic)

    Global Temps. for February = 2nd WARMEST February in 32 years.

    Global Temps. for January = the HOTTEST January for UAH in 32 years.

    Temperatures are rising "0.14C/decade" - UAH

    2010 is on track to be the HOTTEST year on record since 1880.

    So much for global cooling.

    LOL!!!

  • @goog2k do you realize what your'e saying? the Earth is Billions of years old and your saying that Global Warming must be happening because of 32 years of observation!! No one would deny that we are moving in a general trend of warming but, have you ever heard of the medieval warming period? the fallacy with global warming is 100 years of observations as we come out of one of the cooolest periods in the last 1,000 years. look up Jesse Ventura's expos'e of global warming?

  • NEWS:

    Methane Releases from Arctic Shelf May Be Much Larger and Faster Than Anticipated

    NSF - March 4, 2010.

    Research results, published in the March 5 edition of the journal Science, show that the permafrost under the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, long thought to be an impermeable barrier sealing in methane, is perforated and is starting to leak large amounts of methane into the atmosphere. Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming.

  • Still more climate news

    CLIMATE REPORT SHOWS AUSTRALIA GETTING WARMER

    Australia's top scientists on Monday released a "State of the Climate" report at a time of growing scepticism over climate change as a result of revelations of errors in some global scientific reports.

    REUTERS

    March 15, 2010

  • Dissolved CO2 makes acid.

    By 2100, at current rates of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, average ocean pH will drop 0.3 - 0.4 and be @ 7.8 with an increase in acidic H+ ion concentration of 150-200%.

    That will cause a 50% DECREASE of ocean carbonate ions (CO3).

    Carbonate ions are needed for growth by plankton & corals at the base of the ocean's food chain.

    Oops!!!

    For info. on CO2 ocean acidification check:

    Dr. Richard Feely, NOAA

    Ocean Acidification Part 1 of 3

    /watch?v=0KgRpJxWQDw&NR=1

  • Yes fluxes in the mantle are causeonf inceased activity in midrige output and subduction zoanes causing 1) Increased volcanic activity with the Iceland volcano being the most obvious, Earthquakes like Chille,Hati,California in relative succesion,ocean tempature increase at the rifts by the poles, and gas like CO release that causes acidfication

    "AGW" has nothing to so with whats going on

  • @TheRealArchAngel And immigration "problems" in Arizona have nothing to do with earthquakes, volcanic activity, etc. So, therefore, immigration problems in AZ do not exist and have never existed. Logical consistency demands that this be your conclusion.

  • It's Ironic that you bring up the over politicalizes and Media Hyped Immigration law in Arizona as "AGW" os also a over poliuticized Issue via the UN that got Media hype onlt cause of Al Gores bullshit Movie overexagerating the "IPCC's Findings"

    YOu wont find "AGW" in any of the Actual Journals of Science or the "Experts" of the IPCC with any papers in them nor any tests theat proive that Infared light can heat CO2, CO2 heats Air and Water,or Humans are responsible forany part of co2 rise

  • @TheRealArchAngel I guess it is of no use asking for credible sources for your claims. Perhaps a few peer-reviewed papers on the subject would be refreshing. I mean, you would not want to be perceived as a ignoramus stating your own opinions as scientific facts would you. But I guess you expect your claims to be accepted at face value. Surely you must be more competent than the great majority of our renowned climate scientists. Is it only me or am I sensing hubris here?

  • "I guess it is of no use asking for credible sources for your claims."

    any Geology, Meteorology, Oceanography, Vulcanology, Ecology, or Nature Science book written before the liberal Environuts infiltrated the public and higher education system

    "Perhaps a few peer-reviewed papers on the subject would be refreshing"

    All those uniseristy fuckers on goernment panels with "physics degrees ever do is write papers

    Agreement by Peer review doesn't make something a fact,verification and testing does

  • "I mean, you would not want to be perceived as a ignoramus"

    Hey, I'm not the one believing in fairy tales that even the government panel Physicists volunteering their time will tell you what the media and the environuts are saying are not what they are even implying (an opinion of Consensus that AGW is highly likey,not that it is a absolute fact)

    "But I guess you expect your claims to be accepted at face value"

    Nope I am waiting for Ibuki's first data in 2011

    AGW is being verified& tested now

  • @TheRealArchAngel Well, you can wait... the rest of the world can't! Yes you are the one being delusional here. Deluded about your own competence...

  • "Well, you can wait... the rest of the world can't! "

    Why not?

    So far Kyoto hasn't stopped the Whacky Weather and the taxes haven't stop the Seas from rising or the Polar Bears from drowning

    The higher taxes haven't made people buy technology that is either inferior or doesn't even exist ...not to mention aporware cars like the GM Volt will cost Waymore then a cgasoline car (gee which would you fucken buy..the $8000 gasoline car or $60,000 GM Volt($30,000 with taxpayer "government" subsidies)?

  • "Surely you must be more competent than the great majority of our renowned climate scientist"

    What "Climate Scientists"? the few "Scientists" on government panels are Physicists...Geologists,Oceano­graphers and meteorologist work for a living often doing things like sending up satellites to verify the Academic Eggheads predictions..such as with Ibuki, CanX2 and the next generation satellites

    "Is it only me or am I sensing hubris here?"

    Cap and Trade has failed to "save the world",twice

  • @TheRealArchAngel Of course they are. Climate Science is a multidisciplinary endeavour. But apparently you seem to think you know better than the great majority of our renowned climate scientists. You see, you are blaming the scientists for being incompetent and corrupted. And what is the solution. TRUST YOU! Talk about megalomania! Ok, so if the next generation of satellites will support AGW, will you reevaluate your standpoint? I am quite sure you will not!

  • "Of course they are. Climate Science is a multidisciplinary endeavour"

    Yes, so much so that Mechanical Engineers, Mathematicians,Economists,Biol­ogists,and Physists are considered "Climate Scientist"...lol

    "But apparently you seem to think you know better than the great majority of our renowned climate scientists"

    No, just know better then the people claiming they understand "the Gospel" of what the media says the Scientists are supposedly saying (did you understand that?)

    (Even I'm misquoted)

  • "You see, you are blaming the scientists for being incompetent and corrupted"

    No, I hae nothing but respect for Hansen,Weber and the like and I'm not the one putting words into their mouth they didn't even say, it's Al Gore, the Media and Enironut motherfuckers misquoting them and saying they are saying things they didn't even say

    "And what is the solution. TRUST YOU! "

    No, wait for the fucken tests

    Ibuki gets it's peliminary data from 50,000 points in mid 2011

    with NGWS "AGW" be tested by 2013

  • "Ok, so if the next generation of satellites will support AGW, will you reevaluate your standpoint? I am quite sure you will not!"

    Wait a minute

    YOu are suggesting that if the tests conclusively prove Humans cause global warming that I'll not be convinced it is so?

    YOu don't know me,let alone how the Scientific Method Procedures work..lol

    Of course if Co2 clouds apear over cities it will link Co2 to humans and if CO2 concentration effects Weather it proves Co2 causes global warming(Hint:it wont)

  • @goog2k @Nightversionn

    Sorry that that RealArchAsshole is still fanatically persistently spewing his self-delusions all over the internet and, worse -specifically on YouTube channels such as this which seek to inform & educate.

  • Imbuki launched in 2009 and CanX-2 launched in 2008 are sureveying 55,000 points for the most accurate GLobal CO2 average ever and it's loking to be about 166ppm

    Next Month (july 2010) the First of the Next generation Weather Satillites are being launched and they will be working with Imbuli and CanX-2 to TEST if CO2 consentrations effect local Tempature and a weather and therefore climate as the IPCC "experts" predict it does (hint: No,but the real scientists are looking to get them to STFU)

  • @TheRealArchAngel No it hasn't. Those satellites have shown an average of 375ppm of CO2 on the ground.

  • No, that's Keelings Mauna Loa Statioon that sits near a vents of a actrfive Volcano and is used as the main factor of the "Estimated Global CO2 Consentration" because it is the only permanent ground station with sparatic CO2 measurements at sealevel (IPCC report is based Heavilly on Mauna Loa Data)

  • 125,000 years ago a +2C rise in global temps. correlated with a 6-9 meter (25ft) rise in sea levels.

    For a clear assessment of the most recent Climate Change science watch:

    FORA (dot) tv

    Global Warming: How Policy Can Catch Up With Science, Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, 2/23/10 (Environment)

    Dr. Michael Oppenheimer is Professor of Geosciences at Princeton University & was the Lead Author on the third and fourth assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001 & 2007.

  • Geo Scencw..pfft

  • Another farce.

  • UAH global temperature

    February 2010, 2nd WARMEST February in 32 years.

    The global-average lower tropospheric temperature remained high, at +0.61 deg. C for February, 2010. This is about the same as January, which in our new Version 5.3 of the UAH dataset was +0.63 deg. C. February was second warmest in the 32-year record, behind Feb 1998

  • Yes, but the increased tempature

    1) Doesn;t link humans burning fossil fuels to any part of Co12 rise by lab or field test

    2) Doesn't Prove by field or lab test that CO2 rise Causes tempature rrise

  • In just FIVE YEARS between 2004-2009 thick perennial arctic sea ice DROPPED 42%. This was discovered by NASA satellite measurements. Reported 7/7/09

    Search:

    New NASA Satellite Survey Reveals Dramatic Arctic Sea Ice Thinning

    Global Warming is changing our world NOW. CO2 is 35% above levels for 650,000 years. In just 30 years CO2 will be over 450ppm, enough to acidify oceans to the point of stopping the growth of many planktons and corals. They are at the base of the oceans' food chain.

  • Denialists are rasists!

    Their peer reviewed studies are meaningless because they are all a bunch of NEO-CONS!!!

    John Christy, Tim Ball, Patrick Michaels, Roy Spencer and the 30,000 from the Global Warming Petition Project are ALL RASISTS!!!!!

  • Racist? How can they be Racist if there are onloy Humans left on earth?

    Are people proposing AGW Elfs or something?

  • THink you mean Skeptics

    THis has mothing to do with Humans vs Orce,Elves,Dwarfs,etc

  • NEWS:

    Methane Releases from Arctic Shelf May Be Much Larger and Faster Than Anticipated

    NSF - March 4, 2010.

    Research results, published in the March 5 edition of the journal Science, show that the permafrost under the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, long thought to be an impermeable barrier sealing in methane, is perforated and is starting to leak large amounts of methane into the atmosphere. Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming.

  • Search: Climate change odds much worse than thought (MIT, 5/19/09)

    If MIT is right, and if we don't change our ways, temps. will go up 3.5-5.2C this century.

    If permafrost and arctic lakes melt enough to cause an uncontrolled release of methane that's game over, as we know it. That could cause a rapid spike of 10C (18F) in global temps. similar to the Permian Extinction.

    Polar Ice Update

    /watch?v=MozcU7woNNQ

  • ScienceNews

    "These same methane clathrates are present today in the Arctic permafrost as well as below sea level, and remain dormant until triggered by warming.

    "This is a major concern because it's possible that only a little warming can unleash this trapped methane. Unzippering the methane reservoir could warm the Earth TENS OF DEGREES, and the mechanism could be geologically very rapid."

    Permafrost Spews Methane

    /watch?v=1liqk9UQNAQ

  • Excellent point Nightversionn. The deniers are KILLING America's chance to lead the new Green Energy revolution.

    Whoever leads Green Energy will be the leader of the world's future economy.

    JEEZ!!!

  • You said... "Whoever leads Green Energy will be the leader of the world's future economy."

    Did you read Hot, Flat, And Crowded?

    The author Thomas Friedman focused on your point through much of the book.

    He was dealing with the relatively near term. Looking further down the road when the fossil fuels run out and global warming hopefully hasn't killed us off, the cultures that have developed sustainable sources of energy will be much better off.

  • Yes, ReduceGHGs, absolutely.

    I have read Friedman. Fantastic book.

    Obama is also stressing the importance of Green Energy Technology for our economic future.

    Oil, Coal & neo-con deniers are holding back development of Green Energy and are killing America's hope for future economic growth.

  • Yep!

    But I won't go so far as to say the idiots are killing hope for growth. They're vocal but not as effective as they were.  Code Green is here to stay.

    The concept of continued growth is sure engrained in our culture. I contend that growth is NOT sustainable in the long run. (I won that argument with my econ instructor in college.) Nature has constraints. I haven't seen a book that deals with this but if you know of one please send me a link.

  • ReduceGHGs, I agree.

    The earth's ecology has been crashing for 30 years and is accelerating.

    We will soon reach the limits of our natural resources, just like overproducing lemmings.

    Humans aren't so smart after all.

  • That's sure what it looks like.

    I hope we can get out of the traps we unknowingly built for ourselves. Time will tell. I'm pretty sure it won't be without some nasty lessons.

    If we make it, it will be evidence that we aren't just a bunch of "lemmings" mindlessly running from one short-term interest to the next. It will be because we mustered a collective intellect to steer the course. Is there a We or just too many Me, Me, Me, ?

  • YOURE ALL RASIST IF YOU DENY the message of the Gore.

    I KNOW he is not a rasist because he is a democrat. the 2007 and 08 food crisis was ESSENTIAL to our goal of depopulation.

    There is no other end to our means, lets face it, THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE.

  • @TheImposter

    First of all you need to learn how to spell RACIST.

    Yes, there are too many people. On that we agree.

  • What?

  • @goog2k Why does Nightversionn, in particular, suffer from these bastard clones? I've not seen anyone else plagued by clones.

    Deniers are a bunch of anti-American Alex Jones-worshipping freaks (not saying Alex Jones is anti-American: he IS brave.. but NOT on GW).

  • CRU chief Phil Jones:

    -The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't (2009)

    In an interview with the bbc

    BBC: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?

    Phil Jones: Yes

    BBC: When scientists say "the debate on climate change is over", what exactly do they mean?

    Phil Jones: I don't believe the vast majority of climate scientists think this.

  • cupera1 pulls more FALSE DISINFORMATION out of his ass. It's probably completely untrue. So, cite a reference that we can check. But even if it is true, IT'S IRRELEVANT.

    Most of the 70's ice age stuff was pure popular press hookum in Time/Newsweek. So, you are deliberately peddling another canard.

    Science Magazine did a study. There were 7X more published scientific papers warning of Global Warming at the time (even after 30 years of slight cooling because of particulate air pollution.)

  • Arctic summer sea ice surface area has dropped 36% from 8 million sqkm to 5.1 million sqkm since 1980.

    Search:

    Climate Change: NASA's Eyes on the Earth - Arctic Ice

    Arctic ice THICKNESS has dropped 42% in just the last 5 years by satellite measurements.

    Search:

    New NASA Satellite Survey Reveals Dramatic Arctic Sea Ice Thinning

    Together that's OVER a 62% LOSS in arctic sea ice MASS.

    See also:

    ScienceDaily 9/24/09

    "Lasers From Space Show Thinning Of Greenland And Antarctic Ice Sheets"

  • science daily also in 1972 was predicting global cooling

  • the ice surface ice is the normal occurrence after any ice age

    soon, maybe in my great great great grandsons life time, there will be an ice free northwest passage again

    science daily in 1972 was predicting global cooling and ice sheets down to the Dakotas