Added: 4 years ago
From: macumba29
Views: 530,271
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (35,151)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Listen, Climate change is real, but we don't know yet whether or not humans contributed it or not.

  • @DP3mo24hofosho of course climate change is real...the climate has always changed so this is no great scientific discovery! i bet it will change again too....wanna put $10 on it?

  • @badvagirl Climate is always changing, everything is in a state of constant change (duh?), but human activities are accelerating it.  Arguing with deniers is like arguing with Evangelicals about evolution or that the earth is billions of years old, not thousands. But you of course are lying on purpose to serve the financial interests of your corporate masters

  • Behold the complacent tricksters who have nothing to lose because they think they will be dead before the shit hits the fan

    they just wanna burn more oil and are stalling for time

    to anyone below 30(& probably lots of u who are older) you will live long enough & it won't be pretty. If you think the earth is an inherently stable system that is wishful thinking of the highest order

  • @23peaceToady

    I can smell your fear from here ~ go change your skidders.

  • @23peacefrog So all that happened 60-80+ years ago, how was it not human caused global warming back then, but it is now. Seems to me, that all of your dates just prove it happens all the time. I bet that weather back then was the worst in 60 years too. The earth obviously changes temp all the time, and to think that humans could kill the 4.5 billion year old earth in less than 200 years is just funny. The earth was a ball of ice at one time...Things change here.

  • Badvagirl

    "extreme weather"

    What I said is that a warmer earth will

    experience more extreme weather

    There will always be extreme weather but the issue is how much

    I can list some extreme weather events if you really want

  • CO2 one of the building blocks of a productive ecology.

    .

    “Experiments conducted in places like the U.S and Europe, where scientists pumped extra amounts of carbon dioxide gas into forests, did seem to show that such ‘carbon dioxide fertilization,’ caused plants to grow better—up to a point,” says Nemani."

  • @badvagirl

    It was a simple enough question

    How much more co2 does there have to be in the atmosphere b4 an increase in temp will be observed

    You seem to be asserting that co2 does not have an effect on temp

    Which is simply wrong

  • "Changes in rainfall, temperature and sunlight between 1982 and 1999 increased the overall productivity of land plants by 6 percent. This map shows productivity increases in green, while decreases are shown in brown. Productivity increased the most in tropical regions, where climate change resulted in fewer clouds and more sunlight. [Image by Robert Simmon, NASA Earth Observatory, based on data provided by the University of Montana Numerical Terradynamic Simulations Group (NTSG)]"

  • Harvard University put on record 2010 that global average carbon dioxide has not increased says levels halved at the end of the little ice age

  • Green plants taking carbon dioxide to grow

  • @badvagirl

    well cock-a-doody!

    Question for you: how much more co2 would there need to be in the atmosphere to cause an increase in temperature? Rough guess will do(& don't worry I AM aware that co2 is not flammable)

  • @23peacefrog "how much more co2 would have to be in the atmosphere to cause an increase in temperature?"

    actually, the correct question should be 'how much warmer does it have to get to increase the co2 level in the atmosphere since warmer precedes rise in co2'. and i don't know the answer to that....do you?

    i think a good question for you is 'how much co2 would we have to take OUT of the atmosphere to cause a decrease in temperature?

    and, why in hell would you want to make it colder?

  • @23peacefrog yeah...cock-a-doody!!

    you said there were more 'extreme weather events" caused by man made co2...i asked you what, where, when & more extreme compared to what?

    you sooooooooooooooooooo failed to support your assertion. which i totally expected. stop reading AGW blogs, they're nothing but alarmist trash.

  • Photosynthesis has converted all man is additional carbon dioxide into extra life on earth. No possible effect on the weather. Which has been cooling since 1998. Of into 100 leading American academics.

  • @JonThm And yet we can measure the increase and the tell tale signature that says it's our CO2.

    Of course you claimed on my channel that it was Irish Co2. Maybe that acts differently.

  • Photosynthesis converts additional carbon dioxide into extra life on earth. Man made climate change is fiction from nuclear power: and there is no reason to believe nuclear fiction!

  • NEWS ALERT!!!

    another yomamma "green" company bites the dust!!

    Ener1, some kind of whacky battery company that got $118 million from the yomamma crapulous went under.  of course, the $118 million was borrowed from china 7 we still have to pay the interest on that debt.

    the "green energy" scam is worse than the AGW scam.

  • Photosynthesis limits average global carbon dioxide to two parts per 1,000,000. Local levels in cities have no effect. Global warming is fiction from nuclear power and the stupid. You were taught about photosynthesis age 14 the

  • @JonThm Hey, the great thing about science, and in this case the science of man-made climate change, is that it's true, whether you choose to believe in it or not!

  • @JonThm "Photosynthesis limits average global carbon dioxide to two parts per 1,000,000"

    Meanwhile CO2 levels on average rise by 2 parts per million each year. Looks like Jonthm is thinking with his John Thomas.

  • "Earth Day is a creation of the left, a pagan holiday devoted to fashioning a Socialist/Marxist world, even while Marx is being discredited across the globe." (Human Events, 4-28-90)

  • @PrairieDogged

    "you can't define a poor person but still use them as pawns in your game"

    Eh?

  • In China, the true cost of Britain’s clean, green wind power experiment:

    "This toxic poisonous desert that remains is destroying the lives of Chinese farmers, their children and their land. It is what’s left behind after making the magnets for Britain’s latest wind turbines is merely one of a multitude of environmental sins committed in the name of our new green Jerusalem. Britain’s government should be ashamed of the catastrophe taking place in China in the name of green power here in the UK."

  • @PrairieDogged"define a poor person"

    You want me to define a poor person? Why? Is poverty a difficult concept for you to understand? It gives me a headache sinking down to your level

    As for being responsible for them? Nah I ain't responsible for poor people pal just seems to me the very least I can do is give the tiniest shit about them but then that is the difference between me & people like you

  • @23peaceToad

    You cannot define a poor person but you use them as pawns in your game?

    Is a native living in the Amazon rainforest a "poor person" ?

  • @badvagirl

    Ok I explain my ridiculous statement. Warmer means more energy in the system

    Got that? basic

  • "Given the slow rate of forest extension observed thus far, coupled with the climatic, edaphic and ecological factors, it is difficult to envision that the anticipated northward forest expansion and development of new forest communities as projected by model experiments in the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (2004) would be completed by AD 2100. Developing a clearer understanding of the potential rate of response of the northern boreal forest and treeline zone is a critical area for research."

  • @PrairleDogged Very good Prairie, you can find some peer review, but as usual it's a nice cherry pick. If you look at Mann 2009 you see that he does have the Kola Peninsula as an ware that was warm during the MWP. It may have been about the same as the 1990s maybe even today.

    So why more trees? Likely because that period lasted for a century or so. Today's warming is just getting started.

    What do you think, other than you ability to chery pick, your MWP obsession proves?

  • @rugbyguy59

    The paper covered the Holocene and the MWP two separate periods so not just cherry picking one tree like your buddy did ~ what was it's number again? I forgot.

    So empirical evidence pisses all over your hypothetical unprecedented warming story and that still does not dislodge you from your blinkered and stubborn stance on the farcical mirage of CAGW ~ now what does that prove?

  • On the Khibiny uplands located in the central Kola Peninsula, radiocarbon dates from Pinus stumps and forest palaeosols indicate that the treeline was located 100–140m higher in elevation than today during the MWP (between ca AD 600 and 1300 in this case). Forest has yet to recolonize these elevations (Kremenetski et al. 2004).

  • ...cont "In both the Kola and the adjacent northern Fennoscandia, there is evidence for the continuous presence of P. sylvestris trees at their current northern range limits for at least several hundred years prior to the twentieth-century warming. In addition, there are similar patterns of enhanced recruitment in the eighteenth and twentieth centuries in both regions"

  • Climate change and the northern Russian treeline zone

    G.M MacDonald et al

    "Dendroecological studies indicate enhanced conifer recruitment during the twentieth century. However, conifers have not yet recolonized many areas where trees were present during the MWP or the Holocene Thermal Maximum ( 10000–3000 years ago). Reconstruction of tree distributions during the HTM suggests that the future position of the treeline due to global warming may approximate its former Holocene maximum position."

  • ..fan

  • @PrairieDogged

    Re"extreme weather events"

    There r 2 reasons why people talk about an increase in these events being caused by a warmer earth

    1 because they are!

    2 because there is a (depressing) move towards appealing to people's self interest on this issue because

    Unfortunately there are many selfish, ignorant scumbags like you in the western world who do not care about nature, animals, foreigners, poor people or future generations

    Just another sideshow as we wait for the shit to hit the

  • @23peacefrog I think you are speaking to "PrairLeDogged" right

  • @23peacefrog hey froggy you may have chickenlittle syndrome thats a shame as it is known to impair judgement and critical thinking.Or maybe you can present unequivocal evidence that climate sensivity to anthro co2 is high,and that it causes extreme weather events?

  • @ezeeskank Why should peacefrog present those things? The IPCC doesn't present a high climate sensitivity scenario. It's compilation of the available studies indicates a sensitivity of 2 to 4.5C per doubling with the most likely value of 3C. There are studies with high sensitivity like 7C but that isn't the consensus. Of course the low "no worries" case is non-existent.

    AGW doesn't "cause" extreme weather it simply makes them more likely. The evidence for this is readily available on-line.

  • @23peaceToad

    Your hippie is slipping my green tree frog ~ unfortunately you assume I do not care for nature and animals you could not be further from the truth.

    As for "poor" people define a poor person and make a case for why I should responsible for those people.

  • @23peaceToad

    For the educating of the misinformed ( you )

    Please Google this and stfu about natural weather events ok?

    'A
Chronological
Listing of Early Weather Events James
A.
Marusek
'

    .

    You may wish to see that Nightversion'n' gets a copy too as she is also intellectually challenged and suffers the same Green mist as you do ~ have an Ice day and enjoy the reading.

  • @23peaceToad

    htt p: //earthobservatory. nasa. gov/Features/GlobalGarden/

    .

    Read it and weep you pathetic excuse for a eco-warrior.

  • @23peacefrog what increase in extreme weather events?????????????? where? when? compared to what?

    what do you call an "extreme weather event"??? you need to back up this ridiculous statement.

  • Photosynthesis has converted all mankind's additional carbon dioxide into extra life on earth. No effect on the weather possible! The natural climate has been cooling since 1998 anyway!

  • @JonThm 2005, 2010 warmest years. 2011 warmest La Nina year. 11 of warmest 12 years in the 21st century. So yeah, it continues to warm.

    40% rise in CO2 concentrations in the past 175 years. Your plants aren't doing what you say.

    How can a candidate for a science PhD be so uninformed?

  • Man-made climate change does not cause extreme weather we are seeing worldwide, but it is fueling these events

    Duh?

  • This is fairly minimum-effort video, a couple of dodgy media clips, classic IRL stuff. Wonder who posted the original (and why)?

  • @PrairieDogged

    "I wonder whether the eco-nuts have thought of bringing in retrospective tax"

    It's numpties like u who are obsessed by tax

    Every day of our lives the system f**ks us & our future but it's the yet to exist carbon tax that gets you mad?

    I think you are not concerned about this planet because you don't live on it

  • Photosynthesis may use two parts per 1,000,000 carbon dioxide in the air. And has done since the end of the little ice age

  • @JonThm Wow, and that doesn't disprove the consensus of the scientific community that global warming is happening and human activity is accelerating it.

    The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it ;)

  • Photosynthesis metabolises all available carbon dioxide from the air

  • @JonThm You mean there is no CO2 in the atmosphere?????

    Think before you post Jon.

  • @PrairieDogged

    "I have friends who put their trash through the dishwasher before they discard it"

    LOL I don't know to tell you this but your friends are f**kin idiots! Do they think you are the smart one?

    LMFAO

  • Comment removed

  • @23peacefrog

    ecoloons are loons lmfao 2

  • @23peacefrog

    does washing your rubbish cleanse your soul from the guilt of living?

  • @UtubeSpamdetector Can you not read the post?

  • @23peacefrog

    "DoggyStyle" doesn't have any friends.

    But if he did, I'm sure they'd be the type to run their trash through the dishwasher!

  • @YourKidsArentSpecial How was your latest perverted snuff film? Did you pleasure yourself?

  • Newsflash

    Mercury contamination of the water table increases due to landfill seepage.

    Mercury background level increases due to trash incineration.

    Mercury timebomb as billions of CFL's in circulation fail at an alarming rate.

    Mercury real danger when CFL's broken in domestic situations.

  • some of you never understand HUMANS have ONLY been around during the 10,000 year of the NON ICE Age time line in the climate cycle between Ice ages etc.. you have NO concept of whats really going on do you ... even the samples from ICE, Soil and such from History of Earths time line are just guild lines not fact as they very from country to country and still raise questions why this or that happen.. PLS stop being used by the Dem's EPA Agenda that has been proven to have NON PHD's "fake PHD's"!

  • some of you ppl are just too wild and over the deep end! LOL I bet you watch them late night info ads on TV and buy all that snake oil type of cure all stuff LOL

  • I accept that the media "generally" tend to sensationalise things. Even the BBC, bless them, tend to hype things up during their relatively educational offerings. I'm not sure how debunking the media somehow translates to undermining the IPCC and the scientific studies. It just smells too strongly of either political agenda or wishful thinking. There are many commenters below focussing on single factors (like CO2). How can such people presume to have a rational opinion on such complex issues?

  • @bobinhk1 u say: "many commenters...focusing on single factors (like co2)."

    of course...isn't co2 the whole AGW schtick??? they blame co2 for everything that never happens. i think it's called being a "one trick pony".

  • Sorry deniers, but an overwhelming mass of evidence supports the hypothesis of anthropogenic climate change. Also, there exist tens of thousands of papers from thousands of scientists working over the past decades to prove beyond all reasonable doubts that human are changing the atmosphere...

  • @Nightversionn with all those 10s of 1000s of papers & scientists, a reasonable person would think that someone could come up with some evidence that AGW is doing anything to the planet.

    these same scientists say that the climate has been stable for 100s of years & one of the IPCC's head climate gurus says we are entering a period of global cooling!!

    funny how u believed him when he said warming but not when he said cooling.

    y'all are hilariously stupid...but always good for a few laughs.

  • @idiotgirl @gamblinman2002 @gabriella1147

    Hey, idiotgirl... was this you?

    "Arkansas Democrat's cat killed, painted with "liberal" reuters(dot)com, 1/23/12

    Sounds like something you'd do.

  • @badvagirl

    "way smarter than you bub.. debunk ur forest fires..back you into a corner"

    I think u r confusing me with someone else or possibly one of the voices in your head because i don't recall posting anything about forest fires

    You couldn't back your way out of a wet paper bag you loon

  • @23peacefrog that was "ur" in the plural sense...like all y'all...

    y'all read from the same play book so between the fake IDs & the AGW playbook crap, it does get confusing.

    so, ya got any evidence of man made GW or have you given up on that & just gone full time to the personal attack approach?

    and yeah, i am way waaaaayyyyyy waaaayyyyyy smarter than you...ur the one that has to resort to personal attack cuz u lack the intellectual firepower to debate me honestly..

    now git outta here.

  • @badvagirl

    "have u noticed, these loons have tried every trick in the book today..."

    aaah it means a lot to you doesn't it?

    Unfortunately you r only confirming over & over how ignorant and stupid you are(very & very)

    You should use this forum to get together with "Big Wind" PrairieDogged

    A bit of sexy time might lighten you both up a bit!!

  • @23peacefrog i'm way smarter than u, bub. when i back y'all into a corner, do u admit ur full of crap (as we all know you are)?? no, u launch a personal attack like u just did.

    when i totally debunk ur more forest fires, more intense snow & floods BS, do u ever say to urself, "gee, i must be a total like epic dope"? no, u just keep on with more BS. are you interested in the truth?

    or are u just an ignorant fool who has no regard for truth or facts? (i'll go with ignorant fool).

  • @idiotgirl @gamblinman2002 @gabriella1147

    "i'm way smarter than u, bub"

    Oh, my GOD!

    Some idiot who can't even perform SIMPLE DIVISION disparaging someone's intelligence?!?

    You should start attending class, Dopey.

    You're certainly not absorbing anything here, making yourself look like a complete baboon.

  • 1st year Tax rates on new cars ~ not content with ripping the shit out of vehicle owners with fuel duty they have another slice of the cake ~ Exxon / BP etc eat your hearts out you are only novices at this Big Oil for profit game 186-200 CO2 emission (g/km) £445.00 201-225 CO2 emission (g/km) £580.00 226-255 CO2 emission (g/km) £790.00 Over 255 CO2 emission (g/km) £1,000.00 . Yep that is £1000.00 road tax to put your new car on the road (the CO2 portion) plus other taxes of course.
  • @PrairleDogged

    If your gripe is purely taxation then take your anger to the government, not the scientists.

  • @TheElasticJesusRez

    The scientist are the ones creating the illusion on the back of government grants ~ the FOIA emails have plenty of references to the art ~ but then they've been conveniently greenwashed for the "cause"

    Is tax relief a subsidy? does the IRS subsidise you by giving you allowances? asshole !!

  • @DoggyStyle @shitfire @Cleopatra

    Jesus, shitfire.

    You bitch like a six year old little girl about all the taxes you pay, but "think" it's just dandy that oil companies benefits from the infrastructure that YOUR taxes pay for?

    You are INDEED thick as a brick, Dopey.

    Thanks for the comedy!

  • @PrairleDogged have u noticed, if u read back, these loons have tried every trick in the book today. they went with the more frequent forest fires & more intense floods & snow storms....each of which i totally debunked....& what do they do? totally ignore the truth & keep on with their lunacy....it's really amazing!! & then they say they are interested in the truth??? see what ur dealing with?

  • @badvagirl

    They are priceless I heard all this shit forty years ago ~ peal oil ~ pollution yada yada yada ~ and what have they achieved for their multi billion dollars/pound models?

    What difference would anyone notice if all that bogus science never happened? the monies they've filched out of the system for sloppy biased science would have brought relief to many suffering people instead of junketing ex-spurts jetting around the globe to 'save the planet' !!!

  • @PrairleDogged

    * peak :)

  • @badvagirl

    "of which i totally debunked."

    Hahahahahah! You're a legend of your own imagination. Still, prairLETroll will humour you cos he likes birds that can't see the woods for the trees.

    When's the wedding? LOL.

  • BY THE WAY....i am totally disappointed in y'all. i asked what the objections to the keystone pipeline are figuring you enviro-nazis would know and y'all came up with zilch. so i had to write a paper saying there were no real valid objections, just the usual enviro-nazi obstructionism BUT that yomamma would use it as a chip in the upcoming election....so when he gets in trouble, he'll throw you nuts under the bus & say okay, go with the pipeline.

  • Eco-Loons make you wash your trash before you bin it then charge you twice to dump it ~ you could not make it up.

    .

    "Chancellor Alistair Darling has announced that the landfill tax escalator will be extended for another year until 2014 and will continue to increase by £8 per tonne in this years Budget.

    This will mean that landfill tax will be £56 in 2011, £64 in 2012, £72 in 2013, and £80 in 2014 per tonne."

  • "There has been nothing mentioned about the “Carbon Tax’s” effect on refrigerant, so I feel compelled to inform you as a refrigeration wholesaler, that the impact of this useless tax will be massive. The price of refrigerant will rise a minimum of 300% at the wholesale level. This is based on each refrigerants GWP multiplied by the carbon tax per tonne. eg. R404a has a GWP of 3862, which multiplied by $23/tonne equals $88/kg TAX."

    .

    Pass it on the consumer deserves it for LIVING !!!

  • "This fuel escalator forced prices up from one of the lowest in EU to now one of the most expensive. When first added, fuel prices rose by 3p a litre and tax contributed to 72.8% of the total cost. By 1997 the escalator had added 11.1p to the cost of unleaded petrol and was at 75%. It didn’t get any better when the conservatives left office and Gordon Brown took over, as the escalator increased and 3p was added per litre. This took tax up to an incredible 81.5% of the total price of fuel."

    

  • OMG

    Those greedy Oil companies having to find, drill, transport, refine, transport ( again ) then have our not so greedy government hike it up by a measly 81.5% so they can squander it on green follies and keeping the Left Whingers in benefits.

    Talk about biting the hand that feeds them ~ Yawn

  • @PrairleDogged

    I know, what a bummer. You pay 81% tax on fuel that ends up in the Energy company coffers anyway via a $470 billion subsidy.

    ???

  • @TheElasticJesusRez how does 81% tax end up in the energy company coffers?

  • @badvagirl

    Duh! Ready the comment slowly and it might sink in.

  • @badvagirl

    The stretchy eco-loon thinks that because a government does not take ALL of a companies profit in tax it is somehow giving that company a subsidy ~ you know like if you get mugged and the mugger leaves you with $10 for your cab fare the mugger in her mind is subsidising you and you should be grateful ~ lol these juice junkies are a scream.

  • @PrairleDogged i think the oil companies make something like 7 cents a gallon while the govt makes 50 cents a gallon for doing nothing....and then these dopey politicians & enviro-nazis, who probably never took a risk in their lives, want to criticize.

  • @badvagirl

    Lets see some parity with Big Wind shall we?

    '

    Don't hold your breath !!!

    .

    "Slawson Exploration Co. Inc. was charged under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for killing 12 birds that died after allegedly landing in oil waste pits in western North Dakota from May 6 through June 20. Under a plea agreement filed in federal court Monday, Slawson will pay $12,000 — or $1,000 per bird — to the nonprofit National Fish and Wildlife Foundation."

    .

    How many Million was it in Spain? x £1000 Oops

  • @DoggyStyle @shitfire @Cleopatra

    "How many Million was it in Spain?"

    You certainly won't find out from the idiot's article YOU cited, shitfire.

    The... "presentation"... was by a "Mark Duchamp, businessman," who helped pen an article titled "World Is Getting Colder."

    Credible?

    To you dimwits, yes.

  • @DoggyStyle @shitfire @Cleopatra

    "subsidies"

    Wow.

    This isn't that difficult a concept, shitfire.

    Infrastructure, including road manufacture and maintenance cost a lot of money.

    Roads don't just magically appear out of nowhere.

    So when the government says "Here, oil companies! You can use what costs the public TENS OF BILLIONS to maintain... for free!"... THAT'S A SUBSIDY.

    "Muggers and cab fare," shitfire?

    So you're just as ignorant of economical externalities as you are of science.

    Oops.

  • Trust the scientists they have their fingers on the pulse ( grants )

    .

    "However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

    "Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said."

  • @PrairleDogged

    Whoppee do!!!

    I remember someone once saying competition drives down prices - then I had to fill my car and pay my electric bill.

    The things people say, eh?

  • @TheElasticJesusRez

    Yep CO2 tax is a cunt ain't it asshole ~ thanx for confirmation of your greengreed.

  • @PrairieDogged

    So wind turbines struggle struggle in high winds? So we need to innovate and create better technology and hardware surely?

    Or we could just whine & complain like a stupid petulant child about how wind power is useless

  • On 12 Jan 2012, at the First Scientific Congress on Wind Energy and Wildlife Conservation in Spain, the Spanish Society of Ornithology estimated that, yearly, Spain’s 18,000 wind turbines may be killing 6 - 18 million birds and bats . The average per turbine comes down to 333 -1,000 deaths PA, which is a far cry from the 2-4 birds claimed by the US wind industry, or the 400,000 birds a year estimated by the American Bird Conservancy for the whole US, which has twice as many turbines as Spain.

  • @PrairleDogged "wind turbines may be killing 6 - 18 million birds". A visit to wikipedia's List of Fallacies should be a pre-requisite for anyone commenting on a GW vid.

  • Free energy for all ~ rejoice

    .

    "On one of the windiest days in October last year, National Grid paid wind farms £1.6 million, or £361 per MW/h on average, about four times the price that operators would expect to sell their electricity, according to ENDS, the specialist environmental information provider.

    Consumer Focus said that wind-farm operators should not be able to hold National Grid to ransom by demanding huge payments in return for not generating electricity."

    .

    Oops

  • @PrairleDogged

    In 2010 The Fossil-fuel industry received subsidiues to the tune of $470,000,000,000.

    (That is billion to the ornithological layman).

    A much bigger OOOOOOOOPs, I fear.

  • Two years of dropping Oceans ~ Oops

    Just how long does it take rain to return to the sea?

    .

    "According to NASA’s Dr. Hansen, 2010 was the hottest year ever, and Greenland temperatures were also the hottest ever. We are told this led to record melt in Greenland, which caused massive amounts of water to pour into the ocean. Additionally, thermal expansion from the record heat caused the oceans to get much deeper."

    ...cont

  • ...cont

    .

    "Satellite data shows us that sea level has been falling steadily since the start of 2010, which tells us that the missing water and the missing heat must be hiding at the bottom of the ocean – along with the missing intelligence and integrity of government scientists."

    .

    Mmm what will the excuse this year be? soot? lake effect? sulphates? anti-matter? calibration errors on the Jason satellite gets my vote ~ nobody will be able to check the claims *o))

  • @PrairleDogged No excuses just proper science based on measurement rather than the guess work of your "source." The extraordinarily large precipitation events leading to all those floods. But you've been shown the data before. You just prefer your pathetic cherrypicks. LOL

  • @rugbyguy59

    I prefer the sceptics are bottling the water and storing it to make their case stronger ~ lol

    Two years and a 20mm missing H2O that is one hell of a lot of water considering the percentage of our planets surface that is water ~ at this rate ( unless it rains ) we will not need those wellington boots by the year 2100 ~ LOL :o)

  • @PrairleDogged "I prefer the sceptics are bottling the water and storing it to make their case stronger"

    Actually I wouldn't put that past deniers to do that. But, yeah, it was a lot of water and it will take time to get back. Replenishment of reservoirs and aquifers plus moisture held by the ground, etc etc means it doesn't just all pour straight back in. But it looks looks like it's getting there:

    sealevel*colorado*edu/files/20­11_rel4/sl_ns_global*pdf

    You're still cherrypicking

  • @rugbyguy59

    So by your argument the aquifers / reservoirs and water tables were depleted obviously due to your bogieman AGW?

    That is a very interesting observation and if filling those takes 20mm off the oceans mean then surely that would explain the last two decades of rise would it not?

    Some Cherries are bitter at this time of year aren't they LOL

  • @PrairleDogged "due to your bogieman AGW?"

    No but man does play his role. And no it doesn't explain the last few decades. It's only a tiny fraction of the water needed for that. Of course by this point I don't expect you to understand anything about science but there are a lot of things that slow water in it's way back to the sea.

    But I can see the cherry you picked must be bitter as you've avoided looking at (or perhaps just seeing) the latest data. LOL

  • @rugbyguy59 "(Prairle dog: "I prefer the sceptics are bottling the water and storing it to make their case stronger": Actually I wouldn't put that past deniers to do that. " Are you suggesting the doubters might constructively re-engineer the earth and take all necessary mitigation measures to ensure a happy human future, just to spite and defeat the AGWs, and show there's no AGW?

  • @rugbyguy59

    Then there is the Japanese secret Sushi trade angle of course ~ very hush hush but still a measurable effect on an otherwise rising sea level.

  • @DoggyStyle @shitfire @SixOtherSissies

    "sea level has been falling steadily since that start of 2010"

    Funny, shitfire.

    I went ahead and checked out NASA's website(climate(dot)nasa(dot)g­ov) and guess what?

    Not only does it say that the rate of sea level rise is "3.19mm" per year, but that 6mm "pothole" you got so excited about last year has been erased.

    Looks like Cleopatra, the Queen of Denial, is wrong again.

    What a surprise.

    Better luck next time, Dopey.

  • @PrairieDogged

    As usual big ideas scare you into the lamest childish insults! Anything intelligent to say about what our race may be capable of in the future? Or is the ability to extract ever more hard to reach hydrocarbons the sum total of your vision you moron

  • @badvagirl

    "GW is a farce..." etc

    We could develop technology to control climate! Why not?!

    You have no imagination

  • @23peaceToad

    Great idea I suggest a huge stone circle in Wiltshire ~ we could make sacrifices there too to the bean Gods ~ lol

  • Man made global warming is a political movement and false theory

  • Is this guy real?

    .

    "The Alberta Tar Sands are believed to contain the planet’s second-largest deposit of oil, after Saudi Arabia, and extracting it takes a lot more energy than traditional drilling. If we start down that path, warns James Hansen, a climate activist and scientist with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, it will be “game over for the planet.”

    .

    He could always build an Ark :)

  • You have to laugh at these mealy mouthed Left Whingers who could not organise a piss up in a brewery ~ they develop huge monstrosities to catch the wind and a not so free lunch ~ these turn out to be efficient wildlife cullers but not so hot on keeping the power grid going when the wind is strong or the weather is cold ~ like we need masses of power when it's warm and still *o)

    I wonder what their next brainwaves will produce Toxic lightbulbs? Oops

  • @PrairleDogged "Toxic lightbulbs? Oops". I don't get it. Clarify.

  • @PrairleDogged Fossil fuel air pollution kills 2 million prematurely every year. Why do you support fossil fuels?

  • @checkyoursources

    Fossil fuel has enabled seven Billion people to exist ~ why do you have a problem with that or have you a master plan?

  • @PrairleDogged Fossil fuels have meant that humans have exceeded the ability of ecosystem services to cope with our demands hence they are in decline. 1 billion are in poverty and at least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day. Quality of life is more important than quantity of lives.

  • @checkyoursources

    Have you courted the opinion of those 1 billion who are in poverty? and the 80% who live on less than $10 a day ?

    Rather than making rash assumptions on their wish to have been born and therefore to be alive I think you ought to ask them if they would rather no be here don't you?

    I can see now that you indeed do have a 'master plan' to remove the excesses and reduce their carbon input ~ do you tell them or does the solution come in the early hours?

  • @checkyoursources What people are making, has nothing to do with the climate.

  • "Currently, wind power generation only accounts for about 1%, roughly 3 million homes, of all the energy being generated in the US. if renewable energy is mandated to increase to 20% over the years to help curb global warming, the number of bird deaths associated with wind power could increase 20 fold, to roughly 900,000 to 1.8 million deaths a year. "

    .

    So what they're only dumb birds ~ survival of the fittest will ensure only fat flightless Turkeys will prosper  Eh Fiddler *o))

  • @PrairleDogged

    Tell you what, shitfire... Since you're now all weepy for animals, let's see some of that new found concern for the 1 to 2 million of our fine feathered friends that die due to oil and gas extraction, NOT TO MENTION the hundreds of species going extinct due to AGW.

  • htt p: //raptorpolitics. org. uk/2011/07/11/wind-farms-accus­ed-of-concealing-deaths-of-pro­tected-species/

    .

    OMG it's true and there was cunthooks trying to play down the carnage ~ well I never *o))

  • FOS as usual ~ go to the source ~ Oooops ~ there there *o)

    12/01/2012

    SEO/BirdLife presenta una nueva guía para la evaluación del impacto de parques eólicos en aves y murciélagos (12/01/12)

    Hoy en el I Congreso Ibérico sobre Energía Eólica y Conservación de la Fauna

    • Los más de 18.000 aerogeneradores que hay en España, podrían estar causando una mortalidad anual de aves y murciélagos comprendida entre los 6 y 18 millones de individuos

    .

    Comprende ?

  • @PrairleDogged

    Birdysplaticus fuckydofficus.

  • @PrairleDogged

    First of all, shitfire, no one is going to believe that a slack jawed goose stepper who'd be quite comfortable at a Klan rally cares about "birds."

    Second, M. Duchamp has been trumpeting the SAME tripe for years.

    Someone with a more aquiline eye would have noticed that.

    His numbers are bogus and so are you, shitfire.

  • @PrairleDogged

    Guess that's why they DON'T call you "Hawkeye!"

  • UK Viewers - Currently screening on Sky SCIENCE CHANNEL - 'CATASTROPHE.'

    Tony Robinson and a whole of scientists (including Paul Wignall Leed Uni) describing the Permian extinction event, HOW, during the course of the Siberian Traps Event, Hydrogen Sulphide poisoned 95% of all life FOLLOWED BY (and b/c the 10 degree temp rise caused all MH to become unstable) the hydrates then rose to the surface & turned Earth into a giant fireball.

    The scientists go on to warn about current CO2 levels

  • The Green solution to this daily carnage? why lets build dem der turdbines out in the ocean where those nasty deniers cannot pick corpses up and count them ~ sounds like a plan.

  • @PrairleDogged

    "The Green solution to this daily carnage?"

    Wow.

    We're supposed to believe that a "guy" who doesn't give two steaming turds that 42 million people were displaced in one year due to climate related extreme weather events is getting all weepy over "wind turbine bird kills?"

    You take "disingenuous" to previously unseen levels, Dopey.

  • On 12 January 2012, at the First Scientific Congress on Wind Energy and Wildlife Conservation in Jerez de la Frontera, Spain, the Spanish Society of Ornithology (SEO/Birdlife) made public its estimate that, yearly, Spain’s 18,000 wind turbines may be killing 6 to 18 million birds and bats.

  • ...cont The average per turbine comes down to 333 – 1,000 deaths annually, which is a far cry from the 2 – 4 birds claimed by the American wind industry, or the 400,000 birds a year estimated by the American Bird Conservancy for the whole United States, which has about twice as many turbines as Spain.

    .

    Ooops

  • @PrairleDogged

    Doesn't take much investigation, shitfire, to discover that the presenter of these fowl numbers was a "Mark Duchamp," and is NOT basing them on any empirical evidence.

    Yep.

    There's no "there" there.

    Whoops.

  • Ahh but I may as well try and catch the wind.

    .

    watch?v=1RcTjdY1aN4

    .

    'In the chilly hours and minutes of uncertainty'