Tex, again even if it were true that there has been no warming since 1997, that wouldn't prove your point. You just don't know what you are talking about, at all. I can't have a debate with you.
I notice you are all evading the issue here of new data showing no Warming since 1997 but continue to pound on mine & others motives for bringing this up.
Please address the Science & not the messengers motives.
@Texmurphy51 The reason I am not addressing some of the points you bring up is because after our last exchange you've shown that you can't handle rational argumentation. I have tried already.
@Texmurphy51 Project much lol, last time we talked you completely avoided almost ever point I brought up. Like I said, you are far to uninformed to actually debate. I have to teach you not only science but fallacies and argumentation before we ever start talking about global warming and besides you dodge most of the questions I asked anyways. I don't see any point in debating you. Its a waste of my time.
@Texmurphy51 He is a wackjob, even you said so much. You thought he was on our side working as a troll. Beside you have shown that you aren't interested in the facts. Your arguments were so amazingly bad and most didn't even deal with the science but rather conspiracy theory and weird accusations. And I just think the Bill Clinton shows that you have some kind of political ideology that prevents you from believing in AGW. You project so much too.
@Texmurphy51 And lastly, I am not avoiding issue by calling someone as disturbed as vmggie a wackjob. He is a wackjob, and is a total asshole. You're defending him?? WOW
And vmggie, even tex, who is one of the more extreme deniers I have ever talked to, thinks you are a wackjob. I understand why he thinks you are trolling for our side.
@greenman3610 Yeah he is the worst I think, but you attract so many of these insanely hateful and conspiratorial wackjobs on your channel. Why is such a scientific and wonky issue like global warming bring such venom and interest in people who usually don't care about these kind of issues? Not all deniers are this bad, but only people who are this crazy are almost always deniers.
@greenman3610 what would it take for you alarmist nazis to shut up, another ice age or would that be global warming to, you bunch of snivelling alarmist shit bags
@Texmurphy51 I take your point, I wont comment any more Its just I hate them (alarmist) so much It hurts, to read their smug and completely irrational thinking.I can see your using logic to beat them at their own game, and I try to but they flog me off. I have a lot of anger in me because I have been laid off after 26 years in the steel industry due to Australian government announced a carbon tax from that moment the steel industry stopped investing in Australian and started moving overseas
@vmgqie I understand being layed off, I worked in the precision metal stamping industry for 29 yrs & it all moved out of the country. I am now working in the food industry. I understand your frustration over guys like Greenman who simply a propagandists for the left.
I see his comments about the short circuits but will he say the same of the Warmers destructive acts of protest?
I have been called many names by his followers as well so lets be FAIR Greenman.
@Texmurphy51 Sorry but its called science. Try and actually refute the video instead of wasting your time with personal attacks like your friend vmggie over here. Science is very clear, the earth is heating up and it is because of humans, everything else however is up for grabs in the discussion. At least try and accept reality.
He is a propagandist for the left now, very classy. Try and refute the facts in the video please.
@Texmurphy51 My job was exported to china as a direct result of a Government gone crazy with alarmist propaganda and who profited china, where's the green jobs NO WHERE, more lies.Texmurphy you lost your job because of economical forces, I lost my job because of an unproven theory, with massive holes in it. One point I like to make, temperature has been rising for the last 150 years so has carbon because carbon follows temperature so some of the carbon rise is even a natural rise, right
@thesparitan a little turd like have never done a hard day's work in his life and you think you know some think of life, you know nothing, you and your alarmist buddies are what's wrong with this world, your so called solutions don't add up and on a personal level, even though I have never meet you I consider you the most obnoxious, worthless person who comments on the hoax of global warming
@vmgqie "a little turd like have never done a hard day's work in his life" That shows how much you know, I was a laborer in construction at the end and two years after high school. I moved tonnes of material by hand every day for usually 10 hours a day. Is that hard enough for you?
Seriously, you got issues. You know next to nothing about me.
@Texmurphy51 You lost your job to Bill Clinton and you wont elaborate, of course you wont. I think its clear you are only motivated by political considerations rather what is true. There are some scientists that are very respected that don't agree with AGW, richard lindzen for one. He has not been harmed by, well other then the fact he is wrong. You are arguing for a massive conspiracy. But good work taking a wacko like vmggie sides, shows you will go to bed with anyone if they agree.
@Texmurphy51 One last thing, I noticed that after your moment of integrity, you then turned around and accepted vmggie's justifications of his extremely rude and rather crazy behavior on these comments. You then started in on insults and accusations of your own.
I can tell you this for certain, if greenman or anyone who was on my side was acting like vmggie over there, I would rip them a new asshole for that because I wouldn't want anyone to think I support that kind of dialog.
@thesparitan "you then turned around and accepted vmggie's justifications "
I did accuse him of being a Warmer in discuise & did not accept his statements.
However he is no worse than what Warmers have said to me in posts or those who protest & smash windows, & start fires to make their point. (guess they are justified RIGHT?)
I did tell him to use facts & logic because otherwise you get nowhere.
The other ways are Gov control assisted by a supportive media & propaganda
@vmgqie You're a homophobic person as well. Didn't see that coming(sarcasm) You really show why you guys are often insane bigoted conspiracy theorist. Do rational debate can be had with you, it is a waste of everyone's time.
@greenman3610 "I love your posts because they say so much more than I could about who you are."
That is the truth. Personally I find vmggie somewhat interesting because he is so odd. I think he is using this anti-global warming position as an excuse to attack people and work out his own personal demons through online verbal violence. I have seen it before but it is rare. That man has alot of rage in him. He is the kind of person you see on the news.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997
I wonder if Greenman will report this is his videos???????
I think Greenman addressed this in this very video. Instead of Arctic sea ice extent, you are cherry-picking the global temperatures, a figure that varies and is not monotonic. IOW you are not truthful.
There can be proof for a conspiracy, it is a positive claim, you need proof. There would be evidence of a conspiracy and if there is one but no evidence, then no good reason to believe in one.
I address your arguments but you still refuse to even acknowledge BEST study. It isn't a government funded study yet it proves global warming. But you won't even address it. You dismissed it because "it does not matter what study the Koch brothers funded" But it matters what government funded?
Tex there is no talking to you, you believe in an unproven conspiracy theory. I give you a study and you say "nope doesn't count because its apart of the evil communist plot" Every piece of evidence you throw out by claiming, without and proof, that they are bias.
LOOK at the B.E.S.T. study head by richard muller. Then after you read it then respond.
When you address the BEST study and actually read a study for a change I will respond to you, until that time tex, this conversation is over because you are not making any sense.
The land based ice sheets are melting at an accelerating rate. They are currently responsible for about a third of sea level rise, the rest is due to thermal expansion. The share from ice sheets will continue to grow going forward.
see discussion by US Navy Chief Oceanographer Admiral David Titley here, starts at about 3:00
@Texmurphy51 According to many studies, the ice sheets in Greenland that greenman has his panties in a knot about have been much smaller than they are now at least twice in the last 10,000 years. In other words, the climate was even WARMER than now. The most recent occurrence of this was during the Viking era. I wonder if all of their pillaging and burning of towns put so much CO2 in the air it caused climate change ;).
@greenman3610 Except water level will change because you have not taken into account changes in density as a result of an increase in temp. Because water is an odd liquid, it is less dense when frozen than when liquid at low temp. This means that melting ice should cause the level to decrease slightly. Melting a lot of ice should have a noticeable effect. Of course, this must be countered against further warming elsewhere, which may decrease density. Max density is about 4C.
@Texmurphy51 Enjoying reading your posts. Greenman is a climate alarmist, which means he approaches climate change like a religion. Anything that does not agree with this preconceived notion of AGW is either ridiculed or ignored. He isn't interested in facts or truth, he is interested in supporting his own opinion.
@Texmurphy51 You are one of the few people who looks at this rationally. I agree that the data tells us there Earth has warmed. The data does not tell us why or how much it will warm in the future though. There are major problems with greenhouse theory that alarmist simply ignore. Anyone who points out those theories is called stupid and berated for questioning the climate science religion.
A number of climate scientists have advised caution in pursuing any plan of action based on models for the simple reason that the models have been wrong time and time again. I have asked a number of AGW alarmists why, if we understand so much about the climate, are there 17 different climate models, none of which agree? They just brush it off as more is better and never address the underlying issues. There is goo research to suggest that the cycle is natural and within limits.
Finally, alarmists like to ignore anything that does not predict utter destruction and which would not require drastic cuts in industrial production. I think we have a lot of serious problems in this world and throwing resources at something so we can just feel good is stupid. If they had solid data, they would present it. What they have is models that are incomplete, inaccurate, and repeatedly wrong.
not aware of any of my videos that call for drastic cuts in industrial production. please provide an example. What I'd like to see is drastic cuts in carbon releases, as my solutions videos show -
@MewCat100 But the models do agree, the earth is heating up and will continue to heat up if things stay the same. What models are you talking because I would like to fact check that statement. Do you have sources?
@MewCat100 sez "There are major problems with greenhouse theory that alarmist simply ignore"
You are correct on this. Just as there are many errors in the Gore movie that are ignored or said to be there to push the sense of urgency, there are holes in warming theory.
If you are a Climate Scientist, government grants will only come your way if your project is to PROVE GW. The people in charge are also GW believers so as a result all peer reviewed papers are pro warming.
hmmm. its so weird that Richard Muller got a big grant from the oil-soaked Koch Brothers to DIS-prove global warming - then ended up confirming it. oops!!
@Texmurphy51 OK so are you saying that you trust Koch brothers? Well the study they funded and headed by a well known climate skeptic has proven that global warming is real. The temp has been increasing. Richard muller, head of the BEST project that was in part funded by Koch brothers to disprove global warming has verified it.
GET OWNED LOL. Go look it up. Well I guess you now are on our team, welcome to the side of truth good to have you.
the study included this year's Nobel winner in physics, Saul Perlmutter. They collected a billion data points. and they found out what we already knew.
@greenman3610 Facts, they have to hate those pesky things. BTW, I love your videos. They are helping me and others a great deal. I now just put one of your videos in the comment section when they make a stupid debunked claim.
@Texmurphy51 No I trust the Koch brothers funded study that was headed by a famous climate skeptic that shows the earth is heating up. Can you please stay on subject and address that point? You keep dodging my responses. What is your opinion on the BEST study???? I am still waiting.
I cant give opinion on the Koch study because I have not examine it but it makes no difference. You cant point to an invalid study to make YOUR study correct.
My point was that no Government grant money goes to any study but Warming.
YOU are the one who has dodged my original points, then inserted yours to evade the issue.
@Texmurphy51 "You cant point to an invalid study to make YOUR study correct."
What does that even mean? First of all, do you have any proof that the government is giving all the money to only studies that support global warming? Do you actually understand what kind of conspiracy you would need to have 97% of the scientist in on the scam? Its insanity.
Why don't you go look up the best study and get back to me ok.
@Texmurphy51 evidence that the government has created the most complex lie in human history is not a negative. Do you have evidence for a conspiracy? Conspiracies require evidence in the court of law, why not here?
@greenman3610 You dont understand, it makes no difference if it was a myth, or if a few scientists "got it right" . The world consensus was that Global Cooling was reality. All the news carried it and all the people believed it.
Major Scientists of the day proclaimed that it was true.
The Earth Movement & Earth Day were formed around it.
We may look back in the future with a similar video called
@Texmurphy51 Watch greenman's video about cooling that he sent to you. As to the rest, even if true it wouldn't be a conspiracy just an over reaction. And suppose everything you said was true, and its not, then it still would be a totally invalid argument because if something was wrong once doesn't mean it is necessary likely to be wrong again.
Doctors misdiagnose all the time, does that then mean you shouldn't trust a doctors knowledgeable opinion? Your premise is stupid.
@Texmurphy51 So you don't trust doctors? You do listen to them or take their advice because they might be wrong?
BEST is the name of the study, I have been repeating myself over and over again. B.E.S.T. study, look it up. I wasn't funded by the government but by people like the Koch brothers.
There is no evidence that the government conspiracy to advance AGW, besides the republicans control all branches for 4 years, and yet the science continued.
I trust everyone, its just how much I trust them that matters.
"B.E.S.T. study" & I keep repeating myself that it does not matter what study the Koch brothers funded. I am asking you to find me a Gov funded study that is to show evidence AGAINST GW.
I didnt mention conspiracy, YOU DID.
Rep are not against GW research, thats the Tea Party. If they get in charge you WILL see a change
@Texmurphy51 "I am asking you to find me a Gov funded study that is to show evidence AGAINST GW."
There is Richard Lindzen of MIT that is in part funding by the government and he advances the iris theory of climate, which has been proven not to be effective in explaining the heating. But he is very doubtful of AGW.
Beside, the stupidity of what you just asked for is EPIC, example
There is no government funded study that goes against the theory of gravity. See how stupid that was?
@Texmurphy51 "I am asking you to find me a Gov funded study that is to show evidence AGAINST GW."
There doesn't seem to be one perhaps because there is no evidence against GW? I've seen people like you come up with what you think is killer evidence or theories; each one of which has been rebutted a million times over.
@Texmurphy51 And stop avoiding the question, what do you think of BEST study? If you don't know what that is look it up and read; you can read can't you?
Read it and then get back to me, until that time don't bother commenting to me.
@Texmurphy51 You are right about that. Government and politics have no business in science. They corrupt and pollute the research. I see evidence for increasing global temperatures, what I do not see evidence for is a causal link to human CO2, the warming is out of the ordinary, or that the warming will be catastrophic. It has warmed since the last cool period and thankfully lest we would all be frozen to death by now.
@Texmurphy51 What about the Koch brothers funding research study on temperature that shows the earth is heating up? The were privately funded and part of that funding was from deniers. So what about that?
Theres a reason why wind has been growing so rapidly. It's more affordable in comparison to oil and coal in many parts of our planet. More and more people are beginning to realize this.
Carbon tax is a disgusting crime against Humanity. CO2 whether man-made or otherwise doesn't drive global climate, it never has, it never will, the Sun does...
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Carbon Tax. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
Climate changes. Major contributors are solar activity obviously. But also things like the recent iceland volcano which produced IMMEDIATE overall precipitation impacts which are obvious if you look at the data in the path of that one. Therefore it's very HARD to look at short term data and establish an actual CAUSE. But again if everyone drove a log truck 10,000 miles/year it would impact the atmosphere 1.9-2.7ppm IN VOLUME of gas. MOST of that is immediately reconstitutable.
Hey Greenman! I think more than ever we need a "solutions video". On Saturday, the House passed the Full-Year 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year as well as calling for a number of thoughtless cuts. The GOP wants to circumvent the 2007 court case ruling that greenhouse gases are pollutants, so they can stop the EPA from passing regulations as per the Clean Air Act.
@quidproquo2004 They say these regs would kill jobs. Others say it won't. It's probably impossible for this bill to pass the Senate as it and the President has already promised to veto it in its present form. Even so, I think a proper crock response on the notion of "green = joblessness" is needed.
Spain's "green job" story is a nightmare for their economy. Whether you like it or not, fossils will be completely exhausted ). Nuclear power is really the only other large scale option. Solar is still too expensive, and wind power isn't reliable enough for most regions.
Bank on a world with 550ppm by 2060-2075.... The Stern Report stated that even if the entire world adopted the Swedish emissions model, that would put us at 650 by 2100 (not including permafrost loss).
@chicagogeorge keep in mind that Germany has been a strong advocate for green energy. Their private investments was 41.2 Billion dollars in this technology annually but their economy is very healthy compared with most other parts of the world. Us is at about 34 billion yet still our economic crisis is much worse then Germany. Clearly green jobs arn't the cause of the economic crisis.
@chicagogeorge In US between 2009 and 2010 solar energy has doubled it's working force.
wind in US has been increasing annually about 20-30%, in many parts of the world, CA example, wind energy is cheeper then coal.
According to the Michigan Public Service Commission, New Coal 133$ MWH Wind 102$ MWH The CA Energy Commision released similar estimates. At 5/13/08 Wind KWH was average 8.9 cents, Coal was about 10.554 super critical. or 17 per KWH cents with carbon capture+storage.
Hmm i notice no-one is mentioning the "Little Ice Age" we have come out of (requires warming), or sea temperatures and air temperatures that affect sea ice, i like how they leave antartica ( you know our other pole) out of the equation altogether ( its sea ice is growing in size), and more importantly that the naval expert in NO WAY implies that it has anything to do with CO2/global warming or being man-made... Who is really doing the cherry picking here?
@BonzaRam Not everything relevant can be discussed in a single video. Greenman3610 generally tries to keep his videos focused. Try looking into it a bit.
"its sea ice is growing in size." This is true, but it's also true that land ice is in decline. It's also true that the sea ice is growing despite warming southern ocean. Google skepticalscience for more details.
For greater detail on ice science, you can google NSIDC and NOAA.
The "Naval expert" - the US Navy's chief oceanographer, has given several other speeches making himself clear. One thing I never do here is quote out of context. see
watch?v=T3dcc0mV-n4
as for sea ice growing
watch?v=-wbzK4v7GsM
see also the U. of Illinois - google
cryosphere today global sea ice area
and go to 'images" or simply search the cryosphere today site for the global ice area graph.
stop grasping for silly straws and look at the actual information.
Ever heard of the Milankovitch Cycles and Glaciation
In the words of that great scientist - Albert Einstein "Hundreds of people agreeing with me are of no relevance, because it will take just one person to prove me wrong."
There are plenty of alternatives out there that explain this natural process....
"The level of solar activity during the past 70 years is exceptional — the last period of similar magnitude occurred over 8,000 years ago. The Sun was at a similarly high level of magnetic activity for only ~10% of the past 11,400 years, and almost all of the earlier high-activity periods were shorter than the present episode"
Source:
Solanki, Sami K.; et al (2004). "Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years"
@andharvey8 And yet for 60 years, solar activity judged by sunspot number smoothed over the 11-year cycle has been declining while temperatures go up. Solar variations are clearly important; however, they are not dominant.
@andharvey8 Of course we could read the entire abstract and find this last line...
"Although the rarity of the current episode of high average sunspot numbers may indicate that the Sun has contributed to the unusual climate change during the twentieth century, we point out that solar variability is unlikely to have been the dominant cause of the strong warming during the past three decades."
@andharvey8 Point us to the "flawed UEA temperature record" and a comparison of it and the other records. Go to woodfortrees org, use "Mean 121 samples" (11 years running average) and plot HadCRUT3, gistemp and UAH. Tell us what you see.
@andharvey8 Which is to say: You haven't seen it, you can't be bothered looking at the woodfortrees site to make your own plots (it's really easy, kinda fun) to see how consistent the various global T data sets are, and you're just going to come here without your facts and talk about stuff you don't understand for effect?
@robhoneycutt Yes, of course he did. He draws that conclusion by looking at the flawed U. East Anglia temperature record data that Steve McIntyre has soundly refuted.
Not his fault though, climategate took place after he published his paper.
@andharvey8 Fascinating that McIntyre managed to do that considering that all the temperature records agree with each other, including the skeptic managed UAH data.
@541iceman The hypothesis that anthropogenic co2 emissions are causing recent warming(specifically the last quarter of the 20th century) that, if left unchecked, will cause future warming, which will (allegedly) lead to human catastrophe. That's the hypothesis our host, Herr Grunmann, have put out-whether he'll admit it or not.
The difference between sceptics and alarmists is that WE (sceptics) have to PICK a cherry. Greenman3610 just shakes the cherrytree whilst singing the song
watch?v=Tl5amnM_UAY
Just watch his video collection. It's a complete cherry orchard.
@robbieopen Trouble is: sea level rise (radar altimetry), change in ocean temperature (Argo floats +), change in ice sheet elevation (radar and laser altimetry), and ice mass change (GRACE) are converging in a consistent picture of global hydrology. Ice sheets in Greenland and West Antarctica are losing volume and mass.
@robbieopen *Every* measurement system has errors and biases. Calling GRACE "full of errors and biases" is an inaccurate representation of what GRACE *can* do. The point of my post is that GRACE's current performance gives data that are consistent with several other approaches to balancing the global freshwater mass balance. Therefore, treating GRACE as somehow fatally flawed is incorrect.
And why this stupid science of ice surface.. isn't it the ICE VOLUME that should be more interesting? Greenman3610: Bohooo it was the extra precipitation that caused thickening in the arctic .. bullcrap.. it was the extra cold that caused precipitation not the warming. Artic is thicker yay!! The summer will be colder and the 2011 will be quite cold overall.. snow free winters and ice free seas my ass!! the days of AGW idiots are numbered!
@greenman3610 GRACE satellite has its problems and the graphs I have seen over time time shows clear cherry picking. For now GRACE is not a valid source of information...
@hybaj "Not having to do anything with global warming sending out more vapor"
No, it's not "sending more vapor", it's the vapor capacity. Relative humidity stays the same, but the absolute humidity increased with temperature. You got it right that this warmer air to cools off, but the higher absolute humidity leads to higher precipitation.
"I hope we'll be hunting down these warmists clowns down"
You really want to be careful there, people tend to take any hint of violence seriously.
@smartmusicfreak Aren't money that could have been spent otherwise worth of some violence? Some people kill each other for peanuts in comparison to this inhumane human-nature hating agw community. Pollution is a problem but so are AGW laws and BS.
Ah, so you are one of those people that disagree with climate change just because they are afraid of what unknown efforts might be taken to curb it. You don't care that multiple lines of evidence point to human emissions of fossil fuel CO2 are causing an increased greenhouse effect, they are all just a conspiracy to get your money.
Tex, again even if it were true that there has been no warming since 1997, that wouldn't prove your point. You just don't know what you are talking about, at all. I can't have a debate with you.
thesparitan 5 days ago
I notice you are all evading the issue here of new data showing no Warming since 1997 but continue to pound on mine & others motives for bringing this up.
Please address the Science & not the messengers motives.
Texmurphy51 5 days ago
@Texmurphy51 The reason I am not addressing some of the points you bring up is because after our last exchange you've shown that you can't handle rational argumentation. I have tried already.
thesparitan 5 days ago
@thesparitan sez"The reason I am not addressing some of the points you bring up "
I am reporting the NEWS, not my personal opinions.
I am asking you to comment on what those you have used in the past as agents of the truth.
NASA & East Anglia.
You & Greenman seem to be going every direction to avoid addressing the admission & on the data put out by these people.
Your down to finding reasons not to address me.
Address the Science here not me.
I can tell your Beliefs are shaken
Texmurphy51 5 days ago
@Texmurphy51 Project much lol, last time we talked you completely avoided almost ever point I brought up. Like I said, you are far to uninformed to actually debate. I have to teach you not only science but fallacies and argumentation before we ever start talking about global warming and besides you dodge most of the questions I asked anyways. I don't see any point in debating you. Its a waste of my time.
thesparitan 5 days ago
@thesparitan sez"last time we talked you completely avoided almost ever point I brought up"
Thats BS unless your the one that posted 4 to 5 return comments.
I address every point in my return posts to everyone.
You dont need to teach me anything, as I said,
ARE YOU A SCIENTIST, involved with the GW subject?
AGAIN I am NOT asking you to debate me.
Just address the statements recently made by the groups you used as references.
No GW since 1997, address that, or run away.
Texmurphy51 5 days ago
@Texmurphy51 "ARE YOU A SCIENTIST, involved with the GW subject?"
This illustrates my point. This quote of yours is completely irrelevant and the fact you keep on doing it is why no debate..
thesparitan 5 days ago
@thesparitan sez"This quote of yours is completely irrelevant "
No it is Not, when you make a statement you say WE KNOW, like your part of the Scientific community doing the study.
Your only reporting what others say, you cant say WE KNOW.
This is just an attempt to make what you claim be default as truth.
This again is an attempt to get off subject as to the most recent report from Anglia & NASA.
Typical misdirection while someone conjures an explanation for the data
Texmurphy51 3 days ago
@Texmurphy51 Its not misdirection, you made a stupid argument. What recent report from nasa and anglia are you talking about?
thesparitan 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thesparitan sez"What recent report from nasa and anglia are you talking about?"
dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
Texmurphy51 2 days ago
This is typical of the Warmers.
Avoid discussion of the facts & lable those who disagree with you as insane wackjobs.
Please I ask you again mr Greenman to explain the fact that the data from NASA & East Anglia confirm that there has been No Warming since 1997.
The climate models did not predict the trend that is now occuring so whats the excuse.
Stop trying to avoid the issue by calling vmquie a wackjob.
I get much worse language from many of your followers in my posts.
Texmurphy51 5 days ago
@Texmurphy51 He is a wackjob, even you said so much. You thought he was on our side working as a troll. Beside you have shown that you aren't interested in the facts. Your arguments were so amazingly bad and most didn't even deal with the science but rather conspiracy theory and weird accusations. And I just think the Bill Clinton shows that you have some kind of political ideology that prevents you from believing in AGW. You project so much too.
thesparitan 5 days ago
@thesparitan sez"You thought he was on our side working as a troll"
Thats why I questioned him. He may be legit or not but you have people on your side who are as angry.
"Your arguments were so amazingly bad and most didn't even deal with the science "
Are you a Scientist that you can make that judgement?
Funny I make one statement about Clinton & it compromises my motives.
Your dead wrong, as I said my opinions on climate were before clinton.
Better u should ask Greenmans motives
Texmurphy51 5 days ago
@Texmurphy51 And lastly, I am not avoiding issue by calling someone as disturbed as vmggie a wackjob. He is a wackjob, and is a total asshole. You're defending him?? WOW
thesparitan 5 days ago
And vmggie, even tex, who is one of the more extreme deniers I have ever talked to, thinks you are a wackjob. I understand why he thinks you are trolling for our side.
thesparitan 6 days ago
@thesparitan
there are some levels of crazy that you just can't fake.
greenman3610 5 days ago
@greenman3610 Yeah he is the worst I think, but you attract so many of these insanely hateful and conspiratorial wackjobs on your channel. Why is such a scientific and wonky issue like global warming bring such venom and interest in people who usually don't care about these kind of issues? Not all deniers are this bad, but only people who are this crazy are almost always deniers.
thesparitan 5 days ago
you are so full of shit you prick the astronaut was correct
vmgqie 1 week ago
@vmgqie
I love your posts because they say so much more than I could about who you are.
greenman3610 1 week ago
@greenman3610 what would it take for you alarmist nazis to shut up, another ice age or would that be global warming to, you bunch of snivelling alarmist shit bags
vmgqie 1 week ago
@vmgqie Your not making any kind of a logical point by calling names.
I think your probably a Warmer who is pretending to be a so called Denier.
This way you swear & make no actual point but try to make everyone who disagrees with Global Warming look bad.
Are you really Greenman?
Texmurphy51 1 week ago
@Texmurphy51
this is so great. you can just see the circuits shorting out.
Go vmgqie! you are a truthteller!!
greenman3610 1 week ago
@Texmurphy51 I take your point, I wont comment any more Its just I hate them (alarmist) so much It hurts, to read their smug and completely irrational thinking.I can see your using logic to beat them at their own game, and I try to but they flog me off. I have a lot of anger in me because I have been laid off after 26 years in the steel industry due to Australian government announced a carbon tax from that moment the steel industry stopped investing in Australian and started moving overseas
vmgqie 1 week ago
@vmgqie I understand being layed off, I worked in the precision metal stamping industry for 29 yrs & it all moved out of the country. I am now working in the food industry. I understand your frustration over guys like Greenman who simply a propagandists for the left.
I see his comments about the short circuits but will he say the same of the Warmers destructive acts of protest?
I have been called many names by his followers as well so lets be FAIR Greenman.
Texmurphy51 1 week ago
@Texmurphy51 Sorry but its called science. Try and actually refute the video instead of wasting your time with personal attacks like your friend vmggie over here. Science is very clear, the earth is heating up and it is because of humans, everything else however is up for grabs in the discussion. At least try and accept reality.
He is a propagandist for the left now, very classy. Try and refute the facts in the video please.
thesparitan 6 days ago
@Texmurphy51 My job was exported to china as a direct result of a Government gone crazy with alarmist propaganda and who profited china, where's the green jobs NO WHERE, more lies.Texmurphy you lost your job because of economical forces, I lost my job because of an unproven theory, with massive holes in it. One point I like to make, temperature has been rising for the last 150 years so has carbon because carbon follows temperature so some of the carbon rise is even a natural rise, right
vmgqie 6 days ago in playlist Climate Denial Crock of the Week
@vmgqie You lost your job because of neo-liberal economic policies. You are so misinformed it is scary. You can't even figure out who is fucking you.
thesparitan 6 days ago
@thesparitan a little turd like have never done a hard day's work in his life and you think you know some think of life, you know nothing, you and your alarmist buddies are what's wrong with this world, your so called solutions don't add up and on a personal level, even though I have never meet you I consider you the most obnoxious, worthless person who comments on the hoax of global warming
vmgqie 6 days ago
@vmgqie "a little turd like have never done a hard day's work in his life" That shows how much you know, I was a laborer in construction at the end and two years after high school. I moved tonnes of material by hand every day for usually 10 hours a day. Is that hard enough for you?
Seriously, you got issues. You know next to nothing about me.
thesparitan 6 days ago
@thesparitan what are you a Mexican
vmgqie 5 days ago
@vmgqie No I am not. Do I look like I am a mexican? My picture is right there. Wrong again bob. You cannot seem to get anything right LOL.
thesparitan 5 days ago
@vmgqie I lost my job thanks to Bill Clinton,(will not elaborate)
I got another job & moved on.
The Temp has been rising since the last ice age as has happened in the past.
CO2 has risen also, as in the past.
The argument is over what is in control of this.
Warmers say it is CO2, others say it is not.
If your a Climate Scientist you better accept the GW idea our your out of work.
Its like when they were burning witches, if you questioned the idea they burned you too.
Texmurphy51 6 days ago
@Texmurphy51 You lost your job to Bill Clinton and you wont elaborate, of course you wont. I think its clear you are only motivated by political considerations rather what is true. There are some scientists that are very respected that don't agree with AGW, richard lindzen for one. He has not been harmed by, well other then the fact he is wrong. You are arguing for a massive conspiracy. But good work taking a wacko like vmggie sides, shows you will go to bed with anyone if they agree.
thesparitan 6 days ago
@thesparitan "I think its clear you are only motivated by political considerations rather what is true"
So you got from me saying I lost my job UNDER Bill Clinton,(not to), you somehow think that my motivation is not true.
Amazing but untrue. I thought the man created warming was untrue before losing my job.
I have been following this since the Global Cooling era & believe me it is not political.
Its no more a massive conspiracy then Ozone Hole, or Global Cooling.
Its Mass Histeria
Texmurphy51 5 days ago
@Texmurphy51 Can you Google Dr Sami Solanki and read his work and tell me what you think he says, please
vmgqie 6 days ago
@Texmurphy51 One last thing, I noticed that after your moment of integrity, you then turned around and accepted vmggie's justifications of his extremely rude and rather crazy behavior on these comments. You then started in on insults and accusations of your own.
I can tell you this for certain, if greenman or anyone who was on my side was acting like vmggie over there, I would rip them a new asshole for that because I wouldn't want anyone to think I support that kind of dialog.
thesparitan 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thesparitan "you then turned around and accepted vmggie's justifications "
I did accuse him of being a Warmer in discuise & did not accept his statements.
However he is no worse than what Warmers have said to me in posts or those who protest & smash windows, & start fires to make their point. (guess they are justified RIGHT?)
I did tell him to use facts & logic because otherwise you get nowhere.
The other ways are Gov control assisted by a supportive media & propaganda
Texmurphy51 6 days ago
@vmgqie You're a homophobic person as well. Didn't see that coming(sarcasm) You really show why you guys are often insane bigoted conspiracy theorist. Do rational debate can be had with you, it is a waste of everyone's time.
thesparitan 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@greenman3610 "I love your posts because they say so much more than I could about who you are."
That is the truth. Personally I find vmggie somewhat interesting because he is so odd. I think he is using this anti-global warming position as an excuse to attack people and work out his own personal demons through online verbal violence. I have seen it before but it is rare. That man has alot of rage in him. He is the kind of person you see on the news.
thesparitan 6 days ago
A few examples of the cherry pick in the comments
776281 1 week ago
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997
I wonder if Greenman will report this is his videos???????
Texmurphy51 3 weeks ago
@Texmurphy51
I think Greenman addressed this in this very video. Instead of Arctic sea ice extent, you are cherry-picking the global temperatures, a figure that varies and is not monotonic. IOW you are not truthful.
acutube50 3 weeks ago
@Texmurphy51 of cause not he is a cunt, lying ass hole,with his own agenda spreading the lie of global warming
vmgqie 1 week ago
There can be proof for a conspiracy, it is a positive claim, you need proof. There would be evidence of a conspiracy and if there is one but no evidence, then no good reason to believe in one.
I address your arguments but you still refuse to even acknowledge BEST study. It isn't a government funded study yet it proves global warming. But you won't even address it. You dismissed it because "it does not matter what study the Koch brothers funded" But it matters what government funded?
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan what about climategate you prick with ears
vmgqie 1 week ago
@vmgqie go away, you are rude and annoying. No more time for you.
thesparitan 1 week ago
@thesparitan your a gay alarmist pansy, with his head firmly stuck up greenman's ass
vmgqie 1 week ago
It is typical, I ask for one Government funded study to disprove Global Warming.
Warmers cant find one, then say I am creating a "unproven conspiracy theory"
I suppose it I asked for one Cathollic Church funded study to disprove God,
THAT would be an unproven conspiracy theory also.
This is just a feeble attempt to throw the conversation off the point I have made & discredit me.
Instead of answering the question, its a typical smokescreen
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
Tex there is no talking to you, you believe in an unproven conspiracy theory. I give you a study and you say "nope doesn't count because its apart of the evil communist plot" Every piece of evidence you throw out by claiming, without and proof, that they are bias.
LOOK at the B.E.S.T. study head by richard muller. Then after you read it then respond.
thesparitan 1 month ago
When you address the BEST study and actually read a study for a change I will respond to you, until that time tex, this conversation is over because you are not making any sense.
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan What studies do you consider the BEST study?
Please explain why?
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
An excerpt of email from David Thompson of Colorado State to Phil Jones
"the trend in SSTs between 1900 and the present is reliable, but the behavior of the time series from the 1930s to the 1960s is not"
Talk about cherry picking
Texmurphy51 3 months ago
@Texmurphy51
longer time series is better. why is that hard to understand?
greenman3610 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@greenman3610 sez"longer time series is better. why is that hard to understand?"
Its NOT.
Thats why I asked you why they point to the shorter time period of 2000 till now instead of 1997 till now.
Thats why Al Gore selected his time window carefully to make his point, Conveniently ingnoring the longer trends
Texmurphy51 1 week ago
Funny we dont see ocean levels rise dispite this MASSIVE melting.
No mention of the record growth of sea ice in the Antarctic.
Why is the Antarctic ice growing if we are getting warmer?
If you look the ice has been shrinking since the last ice age.
It is a Natural Cycle.
The sky is not falling Chick Little.
Texmurphy51 3 months ago
@Texmurphy51
anyone can go to the university of illinois cryosphere today website and see the graph of global sea ice, which
is definitely declining. so much for your nonsense.
greenman3610 3 months ago
@greenman3610 So your trying to say that Sea ice has NOT been in decline since the last Ice Age?
If it is melting at such a frantic rate why do we not see a sudden rise in Ocean level since 1979?
Texmurphy51 3 months ago
@Texmurphy51
go get a glass of water.
put an ice cube in it.
note the level.
let it melt.
the level will not change, since the water and ice just displace each other.
Sea level rise will come from the land based ice on Greenland and Antarctica.
And sea ice has been relatively stable, based on paleo evidence from greenland, for at least the last 5000 years.
google
2010 nasa Breakup of the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf
greenman3610 3 months ago
@greenman3610
So your saying ONLY the ice in water is melting, NOT the land based ice?
Come on, that does not even make sense.
Glaciers are land based, it has been claimed that they are melting at an "alarming rate"
Dropping off into the ocean, so why no rise in sea level.
Where is the level predicted by that great film of facts by Al Gore?
Are you saying that the Gore film, (based on your science is wrong?)
Again, the ice has been melting for 11K years, whats new?
Texmurphy51 3 months ago
@Texmurphy51
The land based ice sheets are melting at an accelerating rate. They are currently responsible for about a third of sea level rise, the rest is due to thermal expansion. The share from ice sheets will continue to grow going forward.
see discussion by US Navy Chief Oceanographer Admiral David Titley here, starts at about 3:00
watch?v=CBBEyJVj5MY
greenman3610 3 months ago
@greenman3610
see also here
watch?v=Z6roMnYG-44
for NASA video showing Greenland ice sheet melting as measured by GRACE satellite
greenman3610 3 months ago
@greenman3610 From the 1800s to now the sea level has been a steady rise of about 2mm/year.
One would expect a hocky stick graph if what you are saying about GW is true.
The melt rate has been about the same for the last 2000 years, (faster before that).
Your watching the earth go through a natural cycle here.
Your along for the ride, not causing it.
The climate will get cold again when we start into the next ice age.
Texmurphy51 3 months ago
Comment removed
MewCat100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Texmurphy51 According to many studies, the ice sheets in Greenland that greenman has his panties in a knot about have been much smaller than they are now at least twice in the last 10,000 years. In other words, the climate was even WARMER than now. The most recent occurrence of this was during the Viking era. I wonder if all of their pillaging and burning of towns put so much CO2 in the air it caused climate change ;).
MewCat100 1 month ago
@greenman3610 Except water level will change because you have not taken into account changes in density as a result of an increase in temp. Because water is an odd liquid, it is less dense when frozen than when liquid at low temp. This means that melting ice should cause the level to decrease slightly. Melting a lot of ice should have a noticeable effect. Of course, this must be countered against further warming elsewhere, which may decrease density. Max density is about 4C.
MewCat100 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51
see the US Navy's chief oceanographer on sea level rise here
watch?v=CBBEyJVj5MY
for recent research on accelerating mass loss from Antarctica, google
"Increasing rates of ice mass loss from the Greenland
and Antarctic ice sheets revealed by GRACE"
greenman3610 3 months ago 2
@greenman3610 The confusion comes from comparison of traditional tidal gauges to Jason-1 satelite measurements.
Jason has measured a linear increase of .1in per year since 1993.
This is about twice the tidal gauge readings but that difference showed up immediately in 1993.
The rate did not double, it is simply an error in measurement between the two. The rate increase is pretty much steady.
If you look at the IPCC predictions since they began they show much greater increase than measured
Texmurphy51 3 months ago
@Texmurphy51
dude, don't tell me - sounds like you can set the US Navy straight on this. It's your patriotic duty, Tex.
greenman3610 3 months ago 2
@greenman3610 They would not listen any more than you do.
Your not trying to dispute my logic but trying to make a joke to get around it.
Fact is that what he said in his speech makes no sense.
Either the idal gauge readings, or the satelite readings are wrong.
The rate did not double, they just disagree.
The rate of ocean rise has been pretty much flat for 2000 years as I see it.
Texmurphy51 3 months ago
@Texmurphy51 Enjoying reading your posts. Greenman is a climate alarmist, which means he approaches climate change like a religion. Anything that does not agree with this preconceived notion of AGW is either ridiculed or ignored. He isn't interested in facts or truth, he is interested in supporting his own opinion.
MewCat100 1 month ago
@MewCat100 In addition he is no more of a Climate Scientist than I am.
This is not about Global Warming, it is about power & control.
There is no doubt the earth has been warming since the last ice age.
The question is, can you say recent warming is caused by humans, or is it natural.
And the big question, is it runaway?
Phil Jones said there is not enough stastical proof to say it is caused by human activity.
It seems they cant accept the word of one of their leaders
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 You are one of the few people who looks at this rationally. I agree that the data tells us there Earth has warmed. The data does not tell us why or how much it will warm in the future though. There are major problems with greenhouse theory that alarmist simply ignore. Anyone who points out those theories is called stupid and berated for questioning the climate science religion.
MewCat100 1 month ago
A number of climate scientists have advised caution in pursuing any plan of action based on models for the simple reason that the models have been wrong time and time again. I have asked a number of AGW alarmists why, if we understand so much about the climate, are there 17 different climate models, none of which agree? They just brush it off as more is better and never address the underlying issues. There is goo research to suggest that the cycle is natural and within limits.
MewCat100 1 month ago
Finally, alarmists like to ignore anything that does not predict utter destruction and which would not require drastic cuts in industrial production. I think we have a lot of serious problems in this world and throwing resources at something so we can just feel good is stupid. If they had solid data, they would present it. What they have is models that are incomplete, inaccurate, and repeatedly wrong.
MewCat100 1 month ago
@MewCat100
not aware of any of my videos that call for drastic cuts in industrial production. please provide an example. What I'd like to see is drastic cuts in carbon releases, as my solutions videos show -
watch?v=pSdnycHfLnQ
watch?v=llIbjC49Fjs
watch?v=WO3V2uXTM6k
watch?v=6J-ijPcv1VM
watch?v=f4yA_kRejp0
greenman3610 1 month ago
@MewCat100 But the models do agree, the earth is heating up and will continue to heat up if things stay the same. What models are you talking because I would like to fact check that statement. Do you have sources?
thesparitan 1 month ago in playlist More videos from greenman3610
@MewCat100 sez "There are major problems with greenhouse theory that alarmist simply ignore"
You are correct on this. Just as there are many errors in the Gore movie that are ignored or said to be there to push the sense of urgency, there are holes in warming theory.
If you are a Climate Scientist, government grants will only come your way if your project is to PROVE GW. The people in charge are also GW believers so as a result all peer reviewed papers are pro warming.
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51
hmmm. its so weird that Richard Muller got a big grant from the oil-soaked Koch Brothers to DIS-prove global warming - then ended up confirming it. oops!!
dang those pesky facts!
watch?v=tciQts-8Cxo
greenman3610 1 month ago
@greenman3610 The Koch Brothers are not Government Grants.
Muller would have taken one if available but it was not.,
If you have the Gov putting up billions of dollars looking for a set answer, your going to find it.
Dang those pesky facts!
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 OK so are you saying that you trust Koch brothers? Well the study they funded and headed by a well known climate skeptic has proven that global warming is real. The temp has been increasing. Richard muller, head of the BEST project that was in part funded by Koch brothers to disprove global warming has verified it.
GET OWNED LOL. Go look it up. Well I guess you now are on our team, welcome to the side of truth good to have you.
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan
the study included this year's Nobel winner in physics, Saul Perlmutter. They collected a billion data points. and they found out what we already knew.
greenman3610 1 month ago
@greenman3610 Facts, they have to hate those pesky things. BTW, I love your videos. They are helping me and others a great deal. I now just put one of your videos in the comment section when they make a stupid debunked claim.
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan why don't you suck his dick, you crawling piece of shit
vmgqie 1 week ago
@thesparitan sez"OK so are you saying that you trust Koch brothers? "
Ok so your saying you trust the Government?
What the hell does me trusting the Koch Bros have to do with our Gov not funding both sides of the argument?
Your saying your PROOF of Global Warming is that the Koch Bros are funding other research.
I think you OWNED yourself. LOL
If thats the type of logic you use to come to what you call "the truth" then it is flawed.
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 No I trust the Koch brothers funded study that was headed by a famous climate skeptic that shows the earth is heating up. Can you please stay on subject and address that point? You keep dodging my responses. What is your opinion on the BEST study???? I am still waiting.
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan sez"You keep dodging my responses"
I cant give opinion on the Koch study because I have not examine it but it makes no difference. You cant point to an invalid study to make YOUR study correct.
My point was that no Government grant money goes to any study but Warming.
YOU are the one who has dodged my original points, then inserted yours to evade the issue.
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 "You cant point to an invalid study to make YOUR study correct."
What does that even mean? First of all, do you have any proof that the government is giving all the money to only studies that support global warming? Do you actually understand what kind of conspiracy you would need to have 97% of the scientist in on the scam? Its insanity.
Why don't you go look up the best study and get back to me ok.
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan sez"What does that even mean? "
Means what I said. You cant point to an flawed Scientific study to show yours is correct.
If I conducted my own study with my home thermometer, how would that prove your superscience study?
"do you have any proof that the government ...global warming?"
Your asking me to prove a negative.
If no study exists, I cant find one buy you can still claim there is on.
Look for youself for proof.
There might be one for a joke
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 evidence that the government has created the most complex lie in human history is not a negative. Do you have evidence for a conspiracy? Conspiracies require evidence in the court of law, why not here?
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan I didnt say it was a conspiracy.
When everyone celebrated the First Earth Day, they all thought we were in Global Cooling due to polution.
Was that a conspiricy at the time?
It was reported everywhere and was public consensis just as Warming is now.
Major Scientists like Segan were on TV telling us that we were headed for Nuclear Winter due to it.
There was talk of putting carbon dust on glaciers.
Was that a conspiracy????
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51
"70s global cooling" myth
watch?v=XB3S0fnOr0M
greenman3610 1 month ago
@greenman3610 You dont understand, it makes no difference if it was a myth, or if a few scientists "got it right" . The world consensus was that Global Cooling was reality. All the news carried it and all the people believed it.
Major Scientists of the day proclaimed that it was true.
The Earth Movement & Earth Day were formed around it.
We may look back in the future with a similar video called
"Global Warming Myth"
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 Watch greenman's video about cooling that he sent to you. As to the rest, even if true it wouldn't be a conspiracy just an over reaction. And suppose everything you said was true, and its not, then it still would be a totally invalid argument because if something was wrong once doesn't mean it is necessary likely to be wrong again.
Doctors misdiagnose all the time, does that then mean you shouldn't trust a doctors knowledgeable opinion? Your premise is stupid.
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan See the reply I gave to greenman about the video.
sez"just an over reaction"
Maybe what we are doing today is an over reaction also
Maybe the the doctors are wrong again and nothing is wrong with the patient.
It is a well know fact that procedures that are payed for by gov or insurance are overused like pacemakers.
I am sure if Gov was funding he search for Bigfoot we would have many Scientists gathering valid evidence to keep looking.
YOUR premise is stupid
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 So you don't trust doctors? You do listen to them or take their advice because they might be wrong?
BEST is the name of the study, I have been repeating myself over and over again. B.E.S.T. study, look it up. I wasn't funded by the government but by people like the Koch brothers.
There is no evidence that the government conspiracy to advance AGW, besides the republicans control all branches for 4 years, and yet the science continued.
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan sez"So you don't trust doctors?"
I never said that. Did you make it up or what?
I trust everyone, its just how much I trust them that matters.
"B.E.S.T. study" & I keep repeating myself that it does not matter what study the Koch brothers funded. I am asking you to find me a Gov funded study that is to show evidence AGAINST GW.
I didnt mention conspiracy, YOU DID.
Rep are not against GW research, thats the Tea Party. If they get in charge you WILL see a change
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 "I am asking you to find me a Gov funded study that is to show evidence AGAINST GW."
There is Richard Lindzen of MIT that is in part funding by the government and he advances the iris theory of climate, which has been proven not to be effective in explaining the heating. But he is very doubtful of AGW.
Beside, the stupidity of what you just asked for is EPIC, example
There is no government funded study that goes against the theory of gravity. See how stupid that was?
thesparitan 1 month ago
@thesparitan sez"Richard Lindzen of MIT that is in part funding by the government"
Thats the best you can come up with?
"There is no government funded study that goes against the theory of gravity"
There most certain are. There are many Scientific studies that go against the standard theory of gravity. Brane, M-Theory, String Theory.
Anyone who dares have an alternative theory to Warming is burned as a witch by the Media & people like you.
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 "I am asking you to find me a Gov funded study that is to show evidence AGAINST GW."
There doesn't seem to be one perhaps because there is no evidence against GW? I've seen people like you come up with what you think is killer evidence or theories; each one of which has been rebutted a million times over.
acutube50 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@acutube50 sez"There doesn't seem to be one perhaps because there is no evidence against GW?"
How can you tell that with no study?
That is the Assumption made when Gore says the issue is closed.
HOWEVER, latest analysis forced East Anglia to admit there has been No Global Warming since 1997.
Is this enough "evidence" to create a Gov funded study, or are you going Deny the results??
Texmurphy51 3 weeks ago
@Texmurphy51 And stop avoiding the question, what do you think of BEST study? If you don't know what that is look it up and read; you can read can't you?
Read it and then get back to me, until that time don't bother commenting to me.
thesparitan 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 You are right about that. Government and politics have no business in science. They corrupt and pollute the research. I see evidence for increasing global temperatures, what I do not see evidence for is a causal link to human CO2, the warming is out of the ordinary, or that the warming will be catastrophic. It has warmed since the last cool period and thankfully lest we would all be frozen to death by now.
MewCat100 1 month ago
@Texmurphy51 What about the Koch brothers funding research study on temperature that shows the earth is heating up? The were privately funded and part of that funding was from deniers. So what about that?
thesparitan 1 month ago in playlist More videos from greenman3610
@thesparitan sez"What about the Koch brothers funding "
Thats the only funding is independent & is rejected off hand by the so called mainstream.
The big money & power is in Gov/World funding. If I quote some research from Koch brothers you will say that its not peer reviewed so its invalid.
Again show me Gov grant money that goes to show anything but Warming?
Any Scientists who wants to do that research has to go private.
Questioning is what Science is about
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
@greenman3610 I guess the US. Navy never has made any mistakes.
RIGHT
Texmurphy51 1 month ago
Climate denial industry?
BTW, I'm not swayed by graphs of data I couldn't readily verify. Why don't these climate scientists give us the raw data? I can easily plot graphs.
AnotherGlenn 4 months ago
@AnotherGlenn
google
nasa key indicators
hit "download data' and plot away.
or google
wood for trees.
for sea ice go to the nsidc website, click on data and access tools.
plot away.
greenman3610 4 months ago
Theres a reason why wind has been growing so rapidly. It's more affordable in comparison to oil and coal in many parts of our planet. More and more people are beginning to realize this.
curingaging00 5 months ago
deniers ignore ICe CORES, saying the sun causes CO2 buildup.....it's more complicated then that.........idiots.
AceofDlamonds 5 months ago
When you can't hear the arguments from the other side anymore, it's no longer a belief; its a religion.
Landrew0 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Carbon tax is a disgusting crime against Humanity. CO2 whether man-made or otherwise doesn't drive global climate, it never has, it never will, the Sun does...
The Great Global Warming Swindle [Full Film]
watch?v=T8KgbUvsC_o
Galv140577 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Carbon Tax. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
2110kop 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CO2 MAKES UP .038% OF OUR ATMOSPHERE.
FOR MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING THEORY TO WORK, CO2 HAS TO BE RIDICULOUSLY MORE ABSORBENT IN ORDER TO CAUSE CATASTROPHE!
but i can't seem to find these four very important numbers...maybe someone can help?
What % of the IR radiation spectrum can CO2 molecule absorb?
What % of the IR radiation spectrum can nitrogen molecule absorb?
What % of the IR radiation spectrum can oxygen molecule absorb?
What % of the IR radiation spectrum can methane molecule absorb?
Bullpuma 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I present The Quick Glance Guide to Global Warming Part A:
Denial: oi52.tinypic.
com/35d2nie.jpg
Oceans: oi53.tinypic.
com/35b9g08.jpg
Thermometers: oi52.tinypic.
com/2agnous.jpg
Ice: oi52.tinypic.
com/2upvlvm.jpg
NikFromNYC 9 months ago in playlist Climate Denial Crock of the Week
This has been flagged as spam show
I present The Quick Glance Guide to Global Warming Part B:
Earth: oi56.tinypic.
com/16ifevq.jpg
Authority: oi54.tinypic.
com/dny4nt.jpg
Prophecy: oi54.tinypic.
com/2hq5tae.jpg
Psychopathy: oi52.tinypic.
com/i56fsg.jpg
NikFromNYC 9 months ago in playlist Climate Denial Crock of the Week
The man who never walked on the moon.
hunchbacked 1 year ago
Climate changes. Major contributors are solar activity obviously. But also things like the recent iceland volcano which produced IMMEDIATE overall precipitation impacts which are obvious if you look at the data in the path of that one. Therefore it's very HARD to look at short term data and establish an actual CAUSE. But again if everyone drove a log truck 10,000 miles/year it would impact the atmosphere 1.9-2.7ppm IN VOLUME of gas. MOST of that is immediately reconstitutable.
sounddoctorin 1 year ago
Hey Greenman! I think more than ever we need a "solutions video". On Saturday, the House passed the Full-Year 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year as well as calling for a number of thoughtless cuts. The GOP wants to circumvent the 2007 court case ruling that greenhouse gases are pollutants, so they can stop the EPA from passing regulations as per the Clean Air Act.
quidproquo2004 1 year ago
@quidproquo2004 They say these regs would kill jobs. Others say it won't. It's probably impossible for this bill to pass the Senate as it and the President has already promised to veto it in its present form. Even so, I think a proper crock response on the notion of "green = joblessness" is needed.
quidproquo2004 1 year ago
@quidproquo2004 I agree may I suggest telling Spain's green job story as a shining example.
spreckt 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@spreckt "may I suggest telling Spain's green job story as a shining example."
What do you propose we do when the oil runs out? We are already at peak oil, and it will only go down from there.
Do you think that everything is going to just roll smoothly along when that happens?
smartmusicfreak 1 year ago
@spreckt
Spain's "green job" story is a nightmare for their economy. Whether you like it or not, fossils will be completely exhausted ). Nuclear power is really the only other large scale option. Solar is still too expensive, and wind power isn't reliable enough for most regions.
Bank on a world with 550ppm by 2060-2075.... The Stern Report stated that even if the entire world adopted the Swedish emissions model, that would put us at 650 by 2100 (not including permafrost loss).
chicagogeorge 1 year ago
Comment removed
curingaging00 5 months ago
Comment removed
curingaging00 5 months ago
@chicagogeorge keep in mind that Germany has been a strong advocate for green energy. Their private investments was 41.2 Billion dollars in this technology annually but their economy is very healthy compared with most other parts of the world. Us is at about 34 billion yet still our economic crisis is much worse then Germany. Clearly green jobs arn't the cause of the economic crisis.
curingaging00 5 months ago
Comment removed
curingaging00 5 months ago
@chicagogeorge In US between 2009 and 2010 solar energy has doubled it's working force.
wind in US has been increasing annually about 20-30%, in many parts of the world, CA example, wind energy is cheeper then coal.
According to the Michigan Public Service Commission, New Coal 133$ MWH Wind 102$ MWH The CA Energy Commision released similar estimates. At 5/13/08 Wind KWH was average 8.9 cents, Coal was about 10.554 super critical. or 17 per KWH cents with carbon capture+storage.
curingaging00 5 months ago
@quidproquo2004
I know, I know.
The House budget is ridiculous, and will not stand, but you're right, I'm due for a solutions vid.
I have a couple in the pipeline that I've promised to some people, but soon...
greenman3610 1 year ago
Hmm i notice no-one is mentioning the "Little Ice Age" we have come out of (requires warming), or sea temperatures and air temperatures that affect sea ice, i like how they leave antartica ( you know our other pole) out of the equation altogether ( its sea ice is growing in size), and more importantly that the naval expert in NO WAY implies that it has anything to do with CO2/global warming or being man-made... Who is really doing the cherry picking here?
BonzaRam 7 months ago
@BonzaRam Not everything relevant can be discussed in a single video. Greenman3610 generally tries to keep his videos focused. Try looking into it a bit.
"its sea ice is growing in size." This is true, but it's also true that land ice is in decline. It's also true that the sea ice is growing despite warming southern ocean. Google skepticalscience for more details.
For greater detail on ice science, you can google NSIDC and NOAA.
quidproquo2004 7 months ago
@BonzaRam
The "Naval expert" - the US Navy's chief oceanographer, has given several other speeches making himself clear. One thing I never do here is quote out of context. see
watch?v=T3dcc0mV-n4
as for sea ice growing
watch?v=-wbzK4v7GsM
see also the U. of Illinois - google
cryosphere today global sea ice area
and go to 'images" or simply search the cryosphere today site for the global ice area graph.
stop grasping for silly straws and look at the actual information.
greenman3610 7 months ago
@greenman3610
Your links are not working for me :(
Ever heard of the Milankovitch Cycles and Glaciation
In the words of that great scientist - Albert Einstein "Hundreds of people agreeing with me are of no relevance, because it will take just one person to prove me wrong."
There are plenty of alternatives out there that explain this natural process....
BonzaRam 7 months ago
@BonzaRam
milankuvitch cycles would be causing slight cooling at this time --- but no glaciation possible from those cycles for some 20,000 years.
watch?v=L2m9SNzxJJA
watch?v=8nrvrkVBt24
google skepticalscience milankovitch
greenman3610 7 months ago
Here's a cherry for ya:
"The level of solar activity during the past 70 years is exceptional — the last period of similar magnitude occurred over 8,000 years ago. The Sun was at a similarly high level of magnetic activity for only ~10% of the past 11,400 years, and almost all of the earlier high-activity periods were shorter than the present episode"
Source:
Solanki, Sami K.; et al (2004). "Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years"
andharvey8 1 year ago
@andharvey8 And yet for 60 years, solar activity judged by sunspot number smoothed over the 11-year cycle has been declining while temperatures go up. Solar variations are clearly important; however, they are not dominant.
541iceman 1 year ago
@andharvey8 Of course we could read the entire abstract and find this last line...
"Although the rarity of the current episode of high average sunspot numbers may indicate that the Sun has contributed to the unusual climate change during the twentieth century, we point out that solar variability is unlikely to have been the dominant cause of the strong warming during the past three decades."
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@robhoneycutt
deniers.
so predictable.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 They make it so easy.
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@greenman3610 Learn to read.
andharvey8 1 year ago
@andharvey8 Point us to the "flawed UEA temperature record" and a comparison of it and the other records. Go to woodfortrees org, use "Mean 121 samples" (11 years running average) and plot HadCRUT3, gistemp and UAH. Tell us what you see.
541iceman 1 year ago
@541iceman Why don't you ask Steve McIntyre for it. I'm sure he could help you out.
andharvey8 1 year ago
@andharvey8 Which is to say: You haven't seen it, you can't be bothered looking at the woodfortrees site to make your own plots (it's really easy, kinda fun) to see how consistent the various global T data sets are, and you're just going to come here without your facts and talk about stuff you don't understand for effect?
541iceman 1 year ago
@andharvey8 That's code for "I don't care to validate the things I say."
robhoneycutt 1 year ago 8
@robhoneycutt Yes, of course he did. He draws that conclusion by looking at the flawed U. East Anglia temperature record data that Steve McIntyre has soundly refuted.
Not his fault though, climategate took place after he published his paper.
andharvey8 1 year ago
@andharvey8 Fascinating that McIntyre managed to do that considering that all the temperature records agree with each other, including the skeptic managed UAH data.
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@541iceman The hypothesis that anthropogenic co2 emissions are causing recent warming(specifically the last quarter of the 20th century) that, if left unchecked, will cause future warming, which will (allegedly) lead to human catastrophe. That's the hypothesis our host, Herr Grunmann, have put out-whether he'll admit it or not.
smartalek65 1 year ago
The difference between sceptics and alarmists is that WE (sceptics) have to PICK a cherry. Greenman3610 just shakes the cherrytree whilst singing the song
watch?v=Tl5amnM_UAY
Just watch his video collection. It's a complete cherry orchard.
robbieopen 1 year ago
And here is a paper on the difficult process of converting the data to make maps of it:
- Converting Release-04 Gravity Coefficients into Maps of Equivalent Water Thickness by Chambers.
And one can also go to Wikipedia Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment and watch the Gravity Anomaly Animations on how gravity changes constantly.
Now stop calling GRACE the holy grail for icesheet measuring!
robbieopen 1 year ago
@robbieopen Trouble is: sea level rise (radar altimetry), change in ocean temperature (Argo floats +), change in ice sheet elevation (radar and laser altimetry), and ice mass change (GRACE) are converging in a consistent picture of global hydrology. Ice sheets in Greenland and West Antarctica are losing volume and mass.
541iceman 1 year ago
@541iceman
Not to mention radar ranging satellites and base stations around the Arctic have much less margin of error and agree with the trend from GRACE.
smartmusicfreak 1 year ago
@541iceman Where did I claim that Greenland and West Antarctica do not lose volume and mass?
Quote please!
I only claim that GRACE is a satellite system still full of errors and biases so that we are unable to determine the exact amount of ice loss.
I don't understand your resonse.
robbieopen 1 year ago
@robbieopen *Every* measurement system has errors and biases. Calling GRACE "full of errors and biases" is an inaccurate representation of what GRACE *can* do. The point of my post is that GRACE's current performance gives data that are consistent with several other approaches to balancing the global freshwater mass balance. Therefore, treating GRACE as somehow fatally flawed is incorrect.
541iceman 1 year ago
Well there's more on GRACE:
Evaluation of New GRACE Time-Variable Gravity Data over the Ocean by Don P. Chambers 2006
"The statistics of the residuals represent an upper bound on the uncertainty of
the GRACE data, as it ignores errors in both the Jason-1 and
steric model and any non-seasonal steric variations that are in
the altimetry but not in the steric-correction model."
Just read the conclusion. I think it says enough about the uncertainties of GRACE so far.
robbieopen 1 year ago
And Greenman3610 you should also read the paper:
Interannual variations of the mass balance of the Antarctica and Greenland ice sheets from GRACE by Ramillien et al 2006.
It's beautiful and you won't love it.
robbieopen 1 year ago
And why this stupid science of ice surface.. isn't it the ICE VOLUME that should be more interesting? Greenman3610: Bohooo it was the extra precipitation that caused thickening in the arctic .. bullcrap.. it was the extra cold that caused precipitation not the warming. Artic is thicker yay!! The summer will be colder and the 2011 will be quite cold overall.. snow free winters and ice free seas my ass!! the days of AGW idiots are numbered!
hybaj 1 year ago
@hybaj
the GRACE satellite weighs the ice sheets and measures total mass, which is declining. see here
watch?v=9S_82BUshM8
for explanation, and links to original paper, google
pritchard, GRACE,greenland
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 GRACE satellite has its problems and the graphs I have seen over time time shows clear cherry picking. For now GRACE is not a valid source of information...
hybaj 1 year ago
@hybaj "Not having to do anything with global warming sending out more vapor"
No, it's not "sending more vapor", it's the vapor capacity. Relative humidity stays the same, but the absolute humidity increased with temperature. You got it right that this warmer air to cools off, but the higher absolute humidity leads to higher precipitation.
"I hope we'll be hunting down these warmists clowns down"
You really want to be careful there, people tend to take any hint of violence seriously.
smartmusicfreak 1 year ago
@smartmusicfreak Aren't money that could have been spent otherwise worth of some violence? Some people kill each other for peanuts in comparison to this inhumane human-nature hating agw community. Pollution is a problem but so are AGW laws and BS.
hybaj 1 year ago
@hybaj "but so are AGW laws and BS. "
Ah, so you are one of those people that disagree with climate change just because they are afraid of what unknown efforts might be taken to curb it. You don't care that multiple lines of evidence point to human emissions of fossil fuel CO2 are causing an increased greenhouse effect, they are all just a conspiracy to get your money.
smartmusicfreak 1 year ago