@ShadowedEnvy Or is the act of denying Global warming an evil conspiracy by those "evil" businesses that allow people to earn a living, and raise their living standards.
@TheSmittel If you did not choose to remain in your Righ Wing Talk Rdio/FOX "News" BUBBLE...You might know that more Corporations than not know AGW is 100% REAL & we should do something about it! Basically the Deniers are the under educated knuckle draggers on the Right who know nothing but what Talk Radio tells,the Professional Denialist who work for the ultimate Deniers the Oil,Gas & Coal Industries...And handful of other companies & small businesses owned by Right Wing ideologues!
@shalomyal Be sure to show your indoctrination class our comments and how the ROBBER BARONS plan on "F-ing" the poor who'd like to raise their standard of living.
@shalomyal I'd like to correct ya. All leading science organizations within the realm of the Western "Democratic" type international bureaucratic organizations like UN and IPCC. Scientists can be corrupted or intimidated as anyone else. Just like the people that think the causal link between CO2 and climate change is too far fetched. Scientists paychecks rely on their results. If results don't agree or disprove currently DICTATED outcome THEY GET THE CHOP
I actually think the same people saying weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were real are the same ones saying We need to tax THE WORLD to stop climate change. GLOBALISTS
They just use the Con/ Liberal paradigm as a disinformation tactic.
on another video peter Sinclair the voice your listening to told me observation is not climate science now he says observing trees and flowers from gardeners is ok what a two faced lying son of a bitch its ok to observe things as long as it prescribes to this bullshit global warming theory well fuck you cunt head
@ShalomYal leave the kids out of this. Its not settled science its just propaganda and believe me even the kids will wake up and see its just bullshit to
@vmgqie So its not "settled science" So ALL of the leading science organizations on the planet say - its real and its serious - But you say its not settled. So who should call this one if not the world's leading science organizations????????
@ShalomYal the world leading organizations are corrupt how else are can get grant money they can't get it if they tell the truth. The plant is coming out of the little ice age for the last 150 years and the warming is a natural cycle nothing to worry about. That wont work ,the grant money will dry up and then were would they be. No they keep the fantasy going and the money keeps coming in. I can tell ,the scientists are corrupt, if you talk to them they are not impartial completely one sided
@MrPurpose79 has he? iwent looking for his published literature andonly found blogsites. I did however find a longlist of his failed weather predictions throughout the nineties and noughties. But nevermind, the next coouple of years will see his ridiculous "mini ice-age" predictions dashed and he go into the bin with other idiots like the guy predicting the end of the world last year.
I wonder how much carbon was emitted during the making of this video. Tally up the hours of research on the computer, and the time spent making the video, then add up all the carbon emitted by the 48,000 people who have watched this video.... If you truly believe that human energy use and heat from using industrial devices contributes to catastrophic climate disruption, then you should heed your own words and turn off the computer.
@LaughingAtLiberals Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... we could invest into 21st century renewable power, like China is. One large reason China will whoop us if we don't stop acting afool.
Oh hey! Have you considered the intellitus cash system (do a search on google)? Ive heard some awesome things about it and my friend made a lot of money with it.
@boxingboycow We have already produced 70% of the expected warming that will arise form doubling CO2 from preindustrial levels. Food productiuon has increased 400% in developed countries in the same period. Total deaths for wars has decreased
While we may be resilient, the planet is much more resilient than us. It will still be here as the cockroaches crawl over our bones (but here's the thing. There is some rich fucker with billions who will think he can save himself and viable breeding stock by creating their own biosphere. As ridiculous and as far fetched as it sounds, that's what they want. To survive the planetary decimation that they and their corporate monsters brought about. Assclowns.
Interestingly, whenever you hear the word "interestingly" in this video, it means that the narrator is unable to make his argument any longer. He then reverts to those treasured old stand-bys of ad-hominem and well poisoning. Very cute.
Here is my million dollar question... Why is taking care of the one blue sphere in the the WHOLE KNOWN UNIVERSE that can support the nessesities of human life such a big fucking fight? I mean, just look at Venus and that is what we don't want in our atmosphere, because it will have the same effects on us. Whether it's pumping CO2 into our air or flaming carcinogens into our water, humans seem to care so little about THE ONLY PLANET that can support us, it's amazing we are not all dead already.
@Linkfan001 the thing that should unite climate skeptics and believers as one are optimal sustainable energy soultions for the species then we can consign this C02 is bad stuff to the history books also why are we not encouraged to actually take proactive steps and incentivised to do so eg solar panenels/planting tree's. Becasue this is only about carbon taxes nothing more in my opinion anyway where we all agre is cleaner sustainable fuel sorces lets work on that rather then the taxation rubish!
@Strange0ne I completly argee, I'm just confused as to why the priority is not in place. Someone loses cash flow maybe? Economy and politics will extingush life on earth and when the little green men come by, they will think, "Wow, humans were dumber than the animals and plants they thought they controlled."
What the hell are you talking about? Those that claimed Iraq had WMDs are the very same people that are pushing "Global Warming" ... at least get this right..
Al Gore's puppet masters are using this to steal the little remaining wealth and consolidate their power. Nobody is denying we are abusing this planet and big change is needed but WHY & HOW we can make real change needs to be debated. Lining the pockets of Al Gore through Carbon Tax & Credits is not going to clean up this planet. Scam!
Someone is VERY keen to rush this thing through. Clues lie in the words used and the denigration of anyone wanting to debate the issue: "crock," "ignorant", "denier" etc. I'm sure the debate could continue the debate without resorting to that, but then again, as far as you are concerns, the debate is over, right? Done and dusted. Nothing to see here? But even in this video, scientists very clearly state they do not fully understand the mechanism, or even the consequences.
I agree humans are having a major effect on the climate of this planet - the infestation is out of hand.
But I'm not sure on the so called solutions - taxes and carbon trading schemes. Rich people are going to make an huge amount of money here, and become more powerful. Even now, entrepreneurs are looking for energy efficient solutions; will paying 20% more for your energy accelerate that process significantly? Is it simpler to legislate and force the issue? - but money in that approach!
You are very very sure about this, eh? I'd prefer the debate to go on instead of seeing one camp trying to shut it down and put a big exclamation mark at the end.
Just remember, there are lots of examples in history when the a large proportion of the populace was sure they were right , and everyone else was wrong... examples are everywhere - religious extremist, Japan's wartime ambitions, Vietnam War... etc etc.
Here's the kicker for all you AGW-denialists. NOAA actually used Watts' findings to discover that there was actually a _cool bias_ in the "unreliable" weather stations and isolate it thereby fixing the problem. For once the AGW-denialists, albeit unwittingly, acted as real skeptics and advanced rather than hindered the science of climate change.
Menne 2010
ht tp :// w w w 1.ncdc.noaa. gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2/monthly/menne-etal2010.pdf
@crystalcalia - You either actually didn't watch the video, or you missed the point. Both sets of weather stations (the "reliable" set and the "unreliable" set as per Watts) displayed similar curves depicting temperature _trends_ over same time.
This demonstrated that the "unreliable" stations were in fact reliable after all for measuring changes in temperature.
Yes, you can google reports that are far older than the one I mentioned, and none of which account for plant growth to match increasing CO2. And none of them account for the effects of clouds on the climate. So you want to keep insisting that we destroy entire economies, move ourselves back into the stone age and helpless against asteroids, on the basis of incomplete data and fabricated climate models?
@TheDuneMan92 Yes, liberals have been painting themselves as 'champions' of many people. Unfortunately the reality is far different. They have become the modern day slave owners, oppressing the very people they proclaim to champion.
@Willaev You fucking AGW-deniers are so laughably lame. You posit yourselves as "purely objective" and interested only in "the science" and the physical consequences. But, then you immediately shove your foot (and shit) in your own mouths by showing your extreme political anti-liberal bias and bigotry.
Until the US Green, Socialist, Communist parties and Independents get equal ballot access and media airtime that Demopublicans do, liberals will ALWAYS be the oppressed group.
@mrtest0007 Another clear indication that you are sheeple, appointing blame to an opposing political party. As if the Democrats were completely innocent of violating the people's rights.
@mrtest0007 Republicans ... Democrats, lol ... they are ALL cut from the same cloth you fool. Every person you vote into power is put there by the same Master and are always working for the same agenda. Wake up for crying out loud. It's ALWAYS about the MONEY ... those who have it all control the game and the outcome. ALWAYS!
Their motto ... Divide & Conquer! Stop playing their rigged game.
So jhnthm, The growing season increase, the change in migration patterns, the blooming of flowers earlier, the flow measurements of streams becomeing higher sooner in the summer, the earlier spawning of fish, the melting glaciers and ice cap are all just in our imagination and part of some conspiracy?
I can't believe people are still debating this. This was proven debunked years ago. That's why is is getting nowhere in western political forums. For those of you that believe in man caused global warming I have some Ocean front property to sell you in Arizona.
@cchanderson No, it wasn't debunked. As it is only really beginning to be understood. Yes the earth does have a naturally varying climate, but that doesn't mean human activity can't effect it. So its pretty necessary to study what effects mankind have had/can have on the climate. Just saying its debunked and putting no thought into it is a terrible approach.
Green plants take in all the available CO2. Man's carbon dioxide has increased life on earth but had no possible effect on the weather. That is a nuclear lie
High school biology teaches that extra carbon dioxide in the air goes up an extra life on earth. It can have had no possible effect on the weather. Climate-change believers are mentally defective
@JonThm What does it say about trophic changes? How about the effectsof anthropogenically produced CO2 carbon isotope species on species composition in plant communities? You know, the different uptake of different C species by C4 and CAM plants as opposed to C3 plants? How about the various forcings by things such as albido, H2O vapour etc.? And of course lets not forget the potentially devastating effects of clathrate melting? It might be wise to forget high school. AGW is for big people.
Another thing we're not told is that the NASA study published in nature did not say that there is no other reason for the "biological markers" to behave as they do, leaving the false impression that there isn't one other than the warming greenman's claiming is happening. Science tells us that at least some plants will bloom early due directly to elevated co2 levels, for instance.
@johnm1066 And your point is, nosepicker? Fact is, warming shows nothing of how much, which the satellite data suggests that the surface temperature data IS biased towards warming.
"Corporate giants, many of whom are directly tied in with big oil, and central banks who, far from bankrolling climate change skeptics, are directly invested in the scam of human-induced global warming.
Accusations leveled against global warming skeptics is that they are on the payroll of transnational oil companies, when in fact the opposite is true, oil companies are amongst the biggest promoters of climate change propaganda, emphasized recently by Exxon Mobil's call for a global carbon tax."
@Dayversion "..promoters of climate change propaganda" hahah the biggest pervayor of the "Propaganda" is of course the established international science community. “the leading international network of climate scientists concluded that global warming is 'unequivocal' and that human activity is the main driver. No nationally or internationally recognized organization of scientists holds a dissenting opinion. Not one. The blowhards on FOX don't have peer reviewed studies.
@skydancer365 An alarmist bears no pejorative connotation. For the climate debate, it's someone who thinks that catastrophe is imminent if an extreme course of action isn't taken. The real difference in terms is that denier is used to show contempt and intimidate those who disagree with the notion that science has determined conclusively that human greenhouse emissions significantly and/or catastrophically warm the Earth's climate.
Research Update: Journal of Geophysical Research, paper: "Reconstruction of regional mean sea level anomalies from tide gauges" - Aug 2010.
"The global mean sea level for the period January 1900 to December 2006 is estimated to rise at a rate of 1.56 ± 0.25 mm/yr which is reasonably consistent with earlier estimates, but we do not find significant acceleration"
Six inches of sea level rise per CENTURY, and no acceleration of that trend. The sky isn't falling, Chicken Little.
The Hoax is what you see in the media, and in films like "An Inconvenient Truth". Flooded cities, vast deserts, tremendous hurricanes, etc. All lies, of course. Hurricane activity is at near-record lows...and after 150 years of so-called warming, more than 6X as many people die each year from cold as they do heat.
30 years ago, Hansen told us we had "10 years" to save the planet. 20 years Gore said the same thing. Today...they're still saying the exact same thing. Wake up, people.
"Exxonmobil corp., the world's largest crude oil refiner, supports taxing carbon dioxide as the most efficient way of curbing greenhouse gas emissions, its chief executive said.
"As a businessman, it's hard to speak favourably about any new tax, but a carbon tax strikes me as a more direct, more transparent and more effective approach," Rex Tillerson, CEO of the Irving, Texas based company, said Thursday at the Woodrow Wilson international center for scholars in Washington."
@thesparitan If you knew the origin of the term, as it applies to the AGW debate, you wouldn't look like a fool right now. An ad hominem is a phrase marked by an attack on someone's character. Here, it equates skeptics with the neo-nazis, who deny that the holocaust took place; whereas we skeptics point out that science fails to support the alarmists, the holocaust deniers actually deny the historical fact of the holocaust.
I usually call them "skeptics" but I've had almost as many complain about that word too. There are those, however, who aren't just skeptical but spew blatant untruths. I have no problem calling THEM deniers. The problem is, I haven't met very many actual skeptics.
@Skydancer365 I don't have any problem being called a skeptic. I can actually cite the science in the peer-reviewed literature that supports the skepticism. Although I'm not above smart-alecky remarks (hence the handle), I don't have a problem with civil conversation, either. And, as usual, there's many flaws found in this vid, too. You might be surprised at the way you're out-and-out lied to by the side that calls skeptics by pejoratives. Have a nice day.
I'm actually REALLY, REALLY good at sorting out truth from fact. Mostly because I'm genuinely willing to hear all sides of a case on almost every subject. I know NOBODY else like me in that respect even some who THINK they are.
@Skydancer365 For instance, could you tell when the v.o. incorrectly told you about the NOAA "study" that involved the 70 "optimally" sited stations? What didn't he tell you? That those 70 stations chosen were sited within urban contamination areas. The chosen stations were given high micro-area ratings, meaning that they had no immediate surrounding contamination, but were located within urban contamination areas, which science says we have no way of accurately adjusting for.
@smartalek65 Umm do they deny AGW, Yes ok then they are deniers.
you are wrong about that being an ad hominem because he didnt make a claim against deniers character and then said because of that they are wrong, which would have been a fallacy. Example: You are a moron, therefore what ever you say about global warming is wrong, that is a fallacy. But If I was to point out that you are in fact a moron, which you are, then that is not ad hominem, see you fucking moron go learn about logic.
Godddddd why did you take it to partisan politics and WMDs at the end of the video. If you're trying to carry water for the liberal democrats, you're doing a good job. If you're actually trying to save the human race, you fail miserably. SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT RED VS. BLUE POLITICS AND STICK TO FACTS. Or maybe all you care about is winning 1% more elections in the last 200 years the human race has left? Good job, idiot.
Yes attack the messager and not the message. Funny how the temperature chart starts in 1950, expecially since everyone at NOAA knows that the temperature in the 1930s were higher than they are today. And as far as money...Realist $2million from exxon, Alarmist $1Billion per year from Uncle Sam
@GoreBullWarming To correct you: 1934 is the hottest year on record in the USA which only comprises 2% of the globe. According to NASA temperature records, the hottest year on record globally is 2005. (Globally, 1934 is the 47th hottest year on record). next denier please....p.s. watch "climate change deniers, stop asking for proof"
@phillips78 If most of the world didn't have temperature records back in the 1930s how can they make the claim. Sure, the US only makes up only 2-1/2 percent of the planet, but theat about 10% of the land mass. So how do places like Antartica or even Africa that have very sparce records swamp out the US. It's called "hide the decline"
@GoreBullWarming Over 90% of countries had temp records in the 1930's. Hide the decline was in reference to the decline in tree ring data since 1960, not temps.
@GoreBullWarming As stated 90% of countries had coverage in 1930's, and by 1950 there were over 3000 stations worldwide.
On the "hide the decline" comment, "Hide the decline" refers to a decline in the reliability of tree rings to reflect temperatures after 1960. what problem do you have with Mann putting actual measured temps on a graph which is more accurate than tree rings after 1960? He didn't hide the fact that he put real temp data on the graph, so what is the issue?
@GoreBullWarming You are advertising the video for all those who disagree with you, (which on here is a lot of people) I'm sure the scientist who made it will be grateful.
@GoreBullWarming Not to mention the several million the alarmists get from environmental groups, like that bastion of fairness Greenpeace. The IPCC even broke it's own rules how many times by referencing Greenpeace research.
Exactly WHO are the "alarmists" and how do you define what an "alarmist" is? If you don't want to be called a denialist (or denier), you might want to think about avoiding the use of the word "alarmist".
What happened to sceptics wanting a "fair and open debate" about climate change? Watts did his own research to challenge the global warming hypothesis. Fine, fair play to him. Now that he presented his findings, they should be responded to in the interest of a "fair and open debate". Trying to get the video responding to his research taken down, is not a fair debate. Either nobody likes being challenged but he just can't handle it when someone does or he has something to hide.
Past global warming episodes saw massive growth in life. There's an impending major iceage anyway, we are technically in an iceage NOW. GW will delay a deadly iceage.
.
If global warming is a hoax? BAD
That means we'll have to pay for Co2, the stuff that is produced when we try stay warm & alive. There is an impending major iceage on the way, we wont be able to afford heating, and we wont be able to produce crops in the freezing cold - we'll die.
The idiotic location of a thousand official thermometers over the air conditioner condensors in the middle of the hot parking lot full of newly parked cars has NOTHING to do with Heartland. Any fool can see these thermometers are horrible.
@acavideo I like the petroleum industry. I think we need more drilling, but not in the deep water. That was insane. The real problem is the correxit. That makes the oil spill 10 times more toxic. Get ready for mutant children, USA.
Welll the fact is that psychopaths exist. They are very clever. They rise to the top. They are always conspiring for the hell of it. For kicks, for fun... so of course there are conspiracies. Just because you think there isn't doesn't make it so. These climate weather stations have destroyed the world. They are destroying real climate data. Climate Changers want to destroy the world by manufacturing expensive solar panels and wind systems - anything to put money in the pockets of greedy folk.
Thank God for the CRU email hack. Resist this new religion with Al Gore and David Suzuki as their high priests. Earth's climate is driven by the sun. You cannot stop what the sun will do. CO2 is the gas of life. Do not let politicians fulfill their socialist agendas by redistributing wealth through carbon taxes and technology subsidies. Do not let your leaders steal your money to fix something that doesn't exist. You must resist.
@pharoe316 The sun's activity has not increased since at least 1978 when accurate satellite measurements began; it can't explain the warming we've seen since then. Sorry. I don't care if it explains any past warming.
CO2 traps heat radiation. We've known that for 150 years. Being "the gas of life" (whatever that means) does not negate that. Increasing its concentration by over 35% should theoretically produce a warming effect if all other climate factors stay the same - but they never do.
Go read what those three quotes that the mined from thousands of e-mails actuallty say; try to think for yourself instead of listening to batshit crazy nuts like Glenn Beck and scientists paid by Exxon.
"CO2 is the gas of life. "
...Then go park your car in the garage, leave it running, shut the garage door and enjoy sit there for two hours enjoying the gas of life.
"go park your car in the garage, leave it running, shut the garage door and enjoy sit there for two hours enjoying the gas of life"
.
Eh, if you want to be an activist maybe know what U R talking about.
.
If you gas yourself in your car you die from Carbon Monoxide, & probably sulfur dioxide (the stuff that makes acid rain), Co2 will eventually kill you, but its no way near as bad as the POLLUTION your car makes. Safe Co2 levels are 4x more than current atmospheric levels.
Actually the margin of safety is rather higher than that. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is currently 390 ppm, whereas significant adverse effects occur at > 1% (10,000 ppm; about 26 times atmospheric), and the UK HSE has set the long-term exposure limit at 5000 ppm (13 times atmospheric).
To be rather morbid, I've just calculated (based on a 2007 Toyota Yaris diesel idling at 0.68 L/h) that in a standard single garage, it would take 56 min for CO2 to reach 2% (mild narcosis, hearing impairment), and 228 min to reach 8% (loss of consciousness (LOC) in 10 min). If the engine's CO emissions are maximum permissible under Euro 4, when [CO2] = 8%, [CO] = 530 ppm (CO causes LOC in 2 h at about 800 ppm).
Conclusion: CO2 will get you first - though it's a close-run race.
I'm wondering if that was part of the rationale for the chosen CO limits. A petrol or diesel engine can hardly avoid emitting CO2, so there's not much point reducing CO emissions any further (from a human toxicity point of view, anyway) if they are already so low that CO2 would reach toxic levels first.
@pharoe316" Earth's climate is driven by the sun...." So every single national science organization in every single industrialized country is wrong and you got it all figured out with a little bit of folksy "wisdom" worthy of grandpa on the beverly hillbilies. Riiight.. No wonder people laugh at deniers. No leaders are trying to steal my money. They're simply wanting some companies to pay for the externalized cost of their polution and have some better air quality standards. oooh scary!
what ever happened to global cooling which obama's science czar said we must develop new technology to melt the ice caps. the tide is turning again people see that climate change is a tool for elitist power grabbers and the trojan horse for global enslavement.
@AutoStudent4Life What you are describing never happened. Global Cooling was an idea that a few scientists came up with in the early seventies. It was never more than a guess and was never widely accepted. That is UTTERLY different from Climate Change today which is well supported in science and commonly accepted by climate scientists (among many others).
If the ice caps melt enough to raise sea level, a significant ammount of the coast will be underwater. Also, if freshwater and salt water bodies rise enough to mix, it will destroy their ecosystems. Go ask the people in Greenland if their glaciers that have been there for millenia are melting at record rates or not. Better yet, search YT for "greenland melting glaciers" to see videos of it happening. Then tell me why it's really not happening as I'm sure you will still deny it.
But, how do you explain away Glacier Girl, the P-38 LIghtning whos crew went back to Greenland to retrieve 50 years later, to the day, from when it crashed on the ice? The plane was buried under 268 FEET of NEW ICE! Google "Glacier Girl" to find the story. That hole is 268 FEET deep to the plane that crashed right there in 1942! If Greenland were melting, that plane would be sitting ON TOP OF A MELTING ICE SHEET. This observation in SOUTHERN Greenland proves otherwise....
Those video's you see are of summer melt. The glaciers dont melt in winter.
.
Its like me telling you your freezer is broken by videoing your icecream melting, hours after it was taken out of the freezer.
.
Those glaciers have melted every summer for AT LEAST 2,000 years - there's proof too: Hawaii now sells Glacier melt water that runs in a current under the sea which is 2,000 years old. Look it up, dont be so naive
@OZcheckm8 bullsghit i am fr4om hawaii there is no such thing I am well versed in what u are talking about and u are straight up WRONG. in fact this water is NOT BEING sold in hawaii. what peopole are talking abut is deep cold water harvesting for cooling. Hawaii is also looking at using deep sea water for energy. not for bottled water. there is no glacier water in hawaii. we are in the pacific induction zone with an active volcano. are u a retard or what?
@jimbrown257 yep and a couple of days ago another peice of ice broke of 4 times the size of manhatten almost a quarter of the ice cap and half the size of greenland. also there hasa been global mass flooding and droughts for the last 2 weeks even in russia. even where i live one of the wettest spots on earth.
Dood, did you graduate from the textbook denier school? 'Greenland they used to grow grapes there is a good record' of historical global temperatures?
@co2isgoodal There is no evidence that the medival warming period was a global event. It affected some regions near the north Atlantic. The evidence shows most of the rest of the plant was cooler than today.
@co2isgoodal How is cap n trade going to restrict my freedoms? Talk about "Alarmist!" hahahah. Too bad a petition is not a scientific document. It reminds me of when the nazis had 100 "scientists" put together a paper called "100 scientists against Einstein" stating relativity was a crock. Einstien said, "If they had an argument, one would have sufficed." Every nationally recongnized scientific organization in the world agrees and no dumbass "petition" substitutes for actual evedence.
Dr Miskolczi showed that the solution to a differential equation for the greenhouse effect developed in 1922 by Arthur Milne, wrongly assumed an infinitely thick atmosphere. In re-solving this equation a new term and also a new law of physics have been proposed setting an upper limit to the greenhouse effect. Dr Miskolczis theory indicates that any warming from elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide will eventually be offset by a change in atmospheric moisture content
Dr Miskolczi showed that the solution to a differential equation for the greenhouse effect developed in 1922 by Arthur Milne, wrongly assumed an infinitely thick atmosphere. In re-solving this equation a new term and also a new law of physics have been proposed setting an upper limit to the greenhouse effect. Dr Miskolczis theory indicates that any warming from elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide will eventually be offset by a change in atmospheric moisture content
The relationship between climate and sunspot activity has been well established, going back thousands of years. Recently the sun has gone 'quiet' indicating an upcoming cooling period - as has occurred many times in the past.
However, the so-called 'hockey stick' temperature curve appears to indicate that excess heating is occurring. My concern is the veracity of the data used in this graph. We might be missing the real future problem even though it is being clearly flagged up!
@CombatRocks yes the sun is quiet. All the other reason we normally get global warming are absent and yet there it is. This is ONE reason why we think it is human caused by humans. Also Carbon isotope ratios of our CO2 emission.
The hockey stick graph has been redone several times using data even deniers haven't critisised and it still shows warming.
@kcdl My point is that humans are one possible cause. However, I have not seen sufficiently good evidence that confirms this. There are many other potential causes which could explain recent temp increases. I understand that current thinking is moving away from CO2 and towards methane - a much more likely cause of rapid temp increases. We need to see all the evidence from all possible sources to make a proper assessment.
@CombatRocks Do you think we should try and do something about it just in case? This is the main thing that concerns me. Science is always up for debate. What bothers me about deniers is a lot of them take the view "the science isn't settled so we should do nothing." which is utterly riduculous for several reasons. Even apart from the risk mitigation side of things there are many reason why humans should themselves off fossil fuels beside global warming.
@kcdl Absolutely. But I think that there are too many people trying to stop, or reverse, climate change. That is ridiculous - it's akin to stopping the tides! I think we should prepare for the consequences which we can already see occurring in some parts of the world. We should be spending money on mitigating against drought, famine and enforced relocation. Trying to lower global temperatures in a short timescale is utterly pointless, especially when the jury is still out!!
The Minoan warm period was WARMER than today, the Roman warm period was WARMER than today, and the Medieval warm period was WARMER than today. So much for " the hottest year on record " ...................
@uboat21 The Minoan warm period was WARMER than today... A) no they weren't and b) these warm periods were regional and explained by other factors. What's happening now is global and not explained by other factors... therefor obviously to EVERY SINGLE GD SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATION ON EARTH caused by human activity.
Whoever made this video needs andeditor. "The very same people who told you weapons of mass destruction are real, are telling you climate change, is not". Uh, yeah, I know what you MEANT, but in a literal interpretation of what you said, you are saying that weapons of mass destruction dont exist anywhere.
The lack of attention to that kind of detail kind of irks me and makes the integrity of the spoken word in the rest of the video seem questionable. Just saying. Get an editor, a second set of eyes and ears, anything.
This guy is a MORON. It's been getting COLDER since 1998. This whole scam is an effort to fund a banker-controlled world government, with no elections, no auditing for what they do with the TRILLIONS they expect to extract from us, etc. It has NOTHING to do with saving the planet. If it did, the LAST thing on the list of things to tax, would be Co2, which plants benefit from more of.
These "scientists" denied the Medieval Warming Period, when it was hotter than it is now, and Co2 was lower.
The issue in climate change as far as I can tell is this. Is there something significant going on that is caused by humans and is it an issue. When one looks at a geologically significant data set - Millions of years - there does not appear to be anything going on that has not happened a number of times previously and is not predictable to occur at this time. Check out Dr Bob Carter's videos on YouTube
@gpaldrich The different is other warming period were caused by cyclic phenomena, it other word the things that caused the temperature to go up went away of their own accorded and the earth was allowed to cool again. The current warming is happen faster than previous warming periods and this time it is caused by us, there is a lot of evidence for that. That is a huge difference.
Dr Bob Carter works for oil companies that is a huge conflict of interest I'd say.
I find it funny that you ignorant obama nut sucking libs have chosen to instead of debate with me and show your "facts" on climate change you just vote down my comments....LOL PUSSIES
the funny thing to me is that there has been 7 ice ages, 6 of them prior to human life on earth.....suddenly we caused this one thats coming, just as suddenly we are going to stop it roflmfao....if it's true seeing as their studies are half assed and only done in certain portions of the world....mind you not the largest cold weather nothern land mass...lol bunch of idiots support the epa and the un climate group
lol if everything I have heard from "science" the time scale for our clomate to drastically change, has already started! But as for exact dates lol no but neither do the monkeys building models! As for me being a hoot well dude I try to have fun with what I do but hey its hard to have fun when you have one side not even willing to debate because *slams fist* "dammit we are right" even without absolute proof....
@boxingboycow Who are scientists going to debate? You? Climate modelers can tell you more about their programs shortcomings than you. Those same modelers have high levels of proficiency in mathematics and something called physics. I doubt you can claim same.
NOAA uses as many as 12 models to track hurricanes and I never hear even a whisper of complaint from anyone when it updates a course change of a storm.
Write your code, run your data, publish and then make your argument.
how about the 30,000 climatologist who are sueing al gore over "Global Warming"? not me I am just a guy worried about being taxed the fuck out of for something that has yet to be proven
@boxingboycow, that has been debunked, of all those 30,000 "scientist" there are actualy only a couple real ones and have said that their names have been used without their knowledge.
and the scandal of some scientists "making up numbers" it was shown that the guy who made up those reports wasnt even a scientist...
lol ok sorry 64.out of 100 are not scientist, sorry my bad....your a dick you know that! do me a favor? I wont pull numbers from my ass if you pull your head from yours??
@boxingboycow Choose your poison and have at it. Just out of idle curiosity, who is going to pay for the war in Iraq? Your logic would have a tax cut to pay for it.
The Oregon Petition has never filed its fanciful suit against anyone (and will never). Your government has too many real scientists on its payroll. Don't ever listen to a warning from NOAA about tornadoes or hurricanes ever again.
Once again, publish your research, get yer Nobel Prize, go to Disney World.
@boxingboycow 30,000 climatologist? Hahahahaha. Really where are they? Can you show us a link to a cort transcript? Anything? Let's see their peer reviewed studies. It's a bunch of denier crap. Yes you are stupid to question science without any real reason to do so. Go get your doctorate degree in climatology or a related science publish your thesis have it peer reviewed or STFU because those who DID do that are in aggreement.
@sinistar99 Stupid to question theories that will cost the people of this world trillians of dollars? You're a fucking idiot. You're a lamb who only follows.
No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion of anthropogenic climate change since the American Association of Petroleum Geologists adopted its current position in 2007. Still, it is possible they are wrong. So what are the risks if they are? What if they are not? Google video, "How it all ends." It will be the first one. It is the first of a series of videos to help you understand the risks involved so you can make a cost/benefit analysis,
"The global-average lower tropospheric temperature anomaly soared to +0.72 deg. C in January, 2010. This is the warmest January in the 32-year satellite-based data record."
To see the graph of the "UAH Globally Averaged Satellite-Based Temperature of the Lower Atmosphere, 1979-2010"
the global warming cultists also believe the end of the world is coming in 5 years from global warming. they remind me of the bum standing on the corner with "the end is near" sign but taxing us will solve the hoax to save us again from the end of the world.
Come on, who are these experts that claim the world is ending in five years? You're claiming that others are saying outlandish things but you're using lies to support your bullshit.
How do you plan on (sciensts or us humans) manipulating the weather so we only have climate we LIKE and consider NORMAL and acceptable throughtout the Earth
The ELITE would have all of us believe that the answer is simple...just
CAP & TRADE...
Now if ANYONE thinks that this si the solution then we are in deep trouble!
The idea is not to control the weather to our own personal best. It's quite the contrary, to stop our control/affect completely. once we stop emitting carbon dioxide we let the environment take its own course. That is if we are not too late.
Tomuch4yoo, The ELITE is not driving the global warming cause, if it was we would see far more action from both the U.S. government and more importantly the major corporations that unfortunately have a stranglehold on our economic decisions. Cap and trade is by no means the solution to this problem, and you do a disservice to your own integrity by propagating these uneducated falsities... And the only thing that is "too much" about "yoo" is your unnecessary use of caps.
@boxingboycow So the scientific acadamies of of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada,Caribbean, China, France, Ghana, Germany, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, India, Japan, Kenya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, New Zealand, Russian Academy of Sciences, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Tanzania, Turkey, Uganda, The Royal Society of the United Kingdom, United States, Zambia, Zimbabwe --all part of a big hoax. Right! hahahah!
@sinistar99 ROFL yeah dumbshit, it was proven to be manufactured. Guess blindly following is your way of life, not mine. Dont ever assume you and anyone of your ilk will ever have the power to MAKE me live your life. Global warming is bullshit, the world climate changes all the time and has done it many times before human industrialisation. Deal with it pussy, but stay the fuck out of my life with it.
@boxingboycow oh yeah sure, go ahead denying the obvious. Just don't come crying when oil prices skyrocket, when more wars are fought for oil, food and water, and millions of people flee from newly forming deserts and areas that flood yearly to your area, just because we couldn't stop spewing CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the air.
Do the research. Read the papers. Those ARE the consequences if we do nothing. It's as simple as that.
@ShadowedEnvy Or is the act of denying Global warming an evil conspiracy by those "evil" businesses that allow people to earn a living, and raise their living standards.
Hmmm which is more ridiculous?
TheSmittel 2 days ago
@TheSmittel If you did not choose to remain in your Righ Wing Talk Rdio/FOX "News" BUBBLE...You might know that more Corporations than not know AGW is 100% REAL & we should do something about it! Basically the Deniers are the under educated knuckle draggers on the Right who know nothing but what Talk Radio tells,the Professional Denialist who work for the ultimate Deniers the Oil,Gas & Coal Industries...And handful of other companies & small businesses owned by Right Wing ideologues!
Viracocha711 31 minutes ago
@shalomyal Be sure to show your indoctrination class our comments and how the ROBBER BARONS plan on "F-ing" the poor who'd like to raise their standard of living.
TheSmittel 2 days ago
@shalomyal I'd like to correct ya. All leading science organizations within the realm of the Western "Democratic" type international bureaucratic organizations like UN and IPCC. Scientists can be corrupted or intimidated as anyone else. Just like the people that think the causal link between CO2 and climate change is too far fetched. Scientists paychecks rely on their results. If results don't agree or disprove currently DICTATED outcome THEY GET THE CHOP
TheSmittel 2 days ago
@mrtest0007 I could just as easily ask the same thing about liberals. Its not about CO2, its about population control
TheSmittel 2 days ago
I actually think the same people saying weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were real are the same ones saying We need to tax THE WORLD to stop climate change. GLOBALISTS
They just use the Con/ Liberal paradigm as a disinformation tactic.
TheSmittel 2 days ago
on another video peter Sinclair the voice your listening to told me observation is not climate science now he says observing trees and flowers from gardeners is ok what a two faced lying son of a bitch its ok to observe things as long as it prescribes to this bullshit global warming theory well fuck you cunt head
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
I'm showing this tomorrow in class!!! Keep the vids coming
ShalomYal 3 weeks ago
@ShalomYal leave the kids out of this. Its not settled science its just propaganda and believe me even the kids will wake up and see its just bullshit to
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@vmgqie So its not "settled science" So ALL of the leading science organizations on the planet say - its real and its serious - But you say its not settled. So who should call this one if not the world's leading science organizations????????
ShalomYal 3 weeks ago
@ShalomYal the world leading organizations are corrupt how else are can get grant money they can't get it if they tell the truth. The plant is coming out of the little ice age for the last 150 years and the warming is a natural cycle nothing to worry about. That wont work ,the grant money will dry up and then were would they be. No they keep the fantasy going and the money keeps coming in. I can tell ,the scientists are corrupt, if you talk to them they are not impartial completely one sided
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
Global warming is all an evil conspiracy by those... evil people! Ha ha ha ha! I'm spreading the "truth"!
ShadowedEnvy 3 months ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Piers Corbyn has been destroying all of the alarmist and Murry Salby is going to blow the lid off this crap in a few months.
MrPurpose79 3 months ago
@MrPurpose79 has he? iwent looking for his published literature andonly found blogsites. I did however find a longlist of his failed weather predictions throughout the nineties and noughties. But nevermind, the next coouple of years will see his ridiculous "mini ice-age" predictions dashed and he go into the bin with other idiots like the guy predicting the end of the world last year.
uknowispeaksense 4 weeks ago
Save the planet, kill yourself. Sun Cycles...look it up.
Shoregrey 3 months ago
Climate Change: Crock of the Century
imnotabotrlyimnot 4 months ago
I wonder how much carbon was emitted during the making of this video. Tally up the hours of research on the computer, and the time spent making the video, then add up all the carbon emitted by the 48,000 people who have watched this video.... If you truly believe that human energy use and heat from using industrial devices contributes to catastrophic climate disruption, then you should heed your own words and turn off the computer.
LaughingAtLiberals 4 months ago
@LaughingAtLiberals Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... we could invest into 21st century renewable power, like China is. One large reason China will whoop us if we don't stop acting afool.
ScottBrown666 4 months ago 3
Oh hey! Have you considered the intellitus cash system (do a search on google)? Ive heard some awesome things about it and my friend made a lot of money with it.
TheAnzilina 4 months ago
@boxingboycow We have already produced 70% of the expected warming that will arise form doubling CO2 from preindustrial levels. Food productiuon has increased 400% in developed countries in the same period. Total deaths for wars has decreased
zzebowa 5 months ago
While we may be resilient, the planet is much more resilient than us. It will still be here as the cockroaches crawl over our bones (but here's the thing. There is some rich fucker with billions who will think he can save himself and viable breeding stock by creating their own biosphere. As ridiculous and as far fetched as it sounds, that's what they want. To survive the planetary decimation that they and their corporate monsters brought about. Assclowns.
scientifico 5 months ago
Interestingly, whenever you hear the word "interestingly" in this video, it means that the narrator is unable to make his argument any longer. He then reverts to those treasured old stand-bys of ad-hominem and well poisoning. Very cute.
theoriginalpm 5 months ago
Here is my million dollar question... Why is taking care of the one blue sphere in the the WHOLE KNOWN UNIVERSE that can support the nessesities of human life such a big fucking fight? I mean, just look at Venus and that is what we don't want in our atmosphere, because it will have the same effects on us. Whether it's pumping CO2 into our air or flaming carcinogens into our water, humans seem to care so little about THE ONLY PLANET that can support us, it's amazing we are not all dead already.
Linkfan001 6 months ago
@Linkfan001 the thing that should unite climate skeptics and believers as one are optimal sustainable energy soultions for the species then we can consign this C02 is bad stuff to the history books also why are we not encouraged to actually take proactive steps and incentivised to do so eg solar panenels/planting tree's. Becasue this is only about carbon taxes nothing more in my opinion anyway where we all agre is cleaner sustainable fuel sorces lets work on that rather then the taxation rubish!
Strange0ne 4 months ago
@Strange0ne I completly argee, I'm just confused as to why the priority is not in place. Someone loses cash flow maybe? Economy and politics will extingush life on earth and when the little green men come by, they will think, "Wow, humans were dumber than the animals and plants they thought they controlled."
Linkfan001 4 months ago
What the hell are you talking about? Those that claimed Iraq had WMDs are the very same people that are pushing "Global Warming" ... at least get this right..
Al Gore's puppet masters are using this to steal the little remaining wealth and consolidate their power. Nobody is denying we are abusing this planet and big change is needed but WHY & HOW we can make real change needs to be debated. Lining the pockets of Al Gore through Carbon Tax & Credits is not going to clean up this planet. Scam!
luvmyctd 7 months ago
Someone is VERY keen to rush this thing through. Clues lie in the words used and the denigration of anyone wanting to debate the issue: "crock," "ignorant", "denier" etc. I'm sure the debate could continue the debate without resorting to that, but then again, as far as you are concerns, the debate is over, right? Done and dusted. Nothing to see here? But even in this video, scientists very clearly state they do not fully understand the mechanism, or even the consequences.
grimwat 7 months ago
I agree humans are having a major effect on the climate of this planet - the infestation is out of hand.
But I'm not sure on the so called solutions - taxes and carbon trading schemes. Rich people are going to make an huge amount of money here, and become more powerful. Even now, entrepreneurs are looking for energy efficient solutions; will paying 20% more for your energy accelerate that process significantly? Is it simpler to legislate and force the issue? - but money in that approach!
grimwat 7 months ago
You are very very sure about this, eh? I'd prefer the debate to go on instead of seeing one camp trying to shut it down and put a big exclamation mark at the end.
Just remember, there are lots of examples in history when the a large proportion of the populace was sure they were right , and everyone else was wrong... examples are everywhere - religious extremist, Japan's wartime ambitions, Vietnam War... etc etc.
grimwat 7 months ago
James Cameron is cool he directed ALIENS 2.
LerdoBurgerPimp 9 months ago
sooo why were there sudden climate changes such as ice ages and warm periods, that had up to 3C higher temperature than it is today???
MsMsUnderground 9 months ago
@MsMsUnderground Google "weak sun paradox".
Or view the following video by potholer54.
watch?v=fpF48b6Lsbo
wstevenschneider 8 months ago
Here's the kicker for all you AGW-denialists. NOAA actually used Watts' findings to discover that there was actually a _cool bias_ in the "unreliable" weather stations and isolate it thereby fixing the problem. For once the AGW-denialists, albeit unwittingly, acted as real skeptics and advanced rather than hindered the science of climate change.
Menne 2010
ht tp :// w w w 1.ncdc.noaa. gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2/monthly/menne-etal2010.pdf
(Watts and Co even get credit. Lol.)
wstevenschneider 10 months ago
Da waste of space.
THISREALLYBORESME 10 months ago
Agenda's don't matter. Facts do. Asphalt is hotter than grass. Do you deny it?
crystalcalia 11 months ago
@crystalcalia - You either actually didn't watch the video, or you missed the point. Both sets of weather stations (the "reliable" set and the "unreliable" set as per Watts) displayed similar curves depicting temperature _trends_ over same time.
This demonstrated that the "unreliable" stations were in fact reliable after all for measuring changes in temperature.
wstevenschneider 10 months ago
The question is what will it take for deniers to believe that global warming is real?
thesparitan 11 months ago
I have lived in the San Francisco Bay Area and the Sierra Foothills,
and both places my experience of temperature is always a few
degrees higher than the official pronouncement says it is at the same
time. I have dismissed this as the effect of microclimates, but that may
not be the case.
infowolf1 11 months ago
@TheDuneMan92
Yes, you can google reports that are far older than the one I mentioned, and none of which account for plant growth to match increasing CO2. And none of them account for the effects of clouds on the climate. So you want to keep insisting that we destroy entire economies, move ourselves back into the stone age and helpless against asteroids, on the basis of incomplete data and fabricated climate models?
Willaev 11 months ago
@TheDuneMan92 Yes, liberals have been painting themselves as 'champions' of many people. Unfortunately the reality is far different. They have become the modern day slave owners, oppressing the very people they proclaim to champion.
Willaev 11 months ago
@Willaev You fucking AGW-deniers are so laughably lame. You posit yourselves as "purely objective" and interested only in "the science" and the physical consequences. But, then you immediately shove your foot (and shit) in your own mouths by showing your extreme political anti-liberal bias and bigotry.
Until the US Green, Socialist, Communist parties and Independents get equal ballot access and media airtime that Demopublicans do, liberals will ALWAYS be the oppressed group.
mphello 11 months ago
Why do the Republicans hate the people so much?
mrtest0007 11 months ago 21
@mrtest0007 Another clear indication that you are sheeple, appointing blame to an opposing political party. As if the Democrats were completely innocent of violating the people's rights.
Willaev 11 months ago
@mrtest0007
Because we do not pay to get them elected.
1011myname 11 months ago
@mrtest0007 Republicans ... Democrats, lol ... they are ALL cut from the same cloth you fool. Every person you vote into power is put there by the same Master and are always working for the same agenda. Wake up for crying out loud. It's ALWAYS about the MONEY ... those who have it all control the game and the outcome. ALWAYS!
Their motto ... Divide & Conquer! Stop playing their rigged game.
luvmyctd 7 months ago
@mrtest0007 According to some Republicans, corporations are people too! And Reps sure don't hate those, because they fund their campagins.
w00tehpwn 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrtest0007 "Why do the Republicans hate the people so much?'
Two reason I think. 1) They love money more. 2) Like most humans, until your balls are pressed to the wall it doesn't really matter.
hawklord2001 4 months ago
So jhnthm, The growing season increase, the change in migration patterns, the blooming of flowers earlier, the flow measurements of streams becomeing higher sooner in the summer, the earlier spawning of fish, the melting glaciers and ice cap are all just in our imagination and part of some conspiracy?
MrFitzwilly 1 year ago 3
I can't believe people are still debating this. This was proven debunked years ago. That's why is is getting nowhere in western political forums. For those of you that believe in man caused global warming I have some Ocean front property to sell you in Arizona.
cchanderson 1 year ago
@cchanderson No, it wasn't debunked. As it is only really beginning to be understood. Yes the earth does have a naturally varying climate, but that doesn't mean human activity can't effect it. So its pretty necessary to study what effects mankind have had/can have on the climate. Just saying its debunked and putting no thought into it is a terrible approach.
LemUUU 11 months ago
Green plants take in all the available CO2. Man's carbon dioxide has increased life on earth but had no possible effect on the weather. That is a nuclear lie
JonThm 1 year ago
High school biology teaches that extra carbon dioxide in the air goes up an extra life on earth. It can have had no possible effect on the weather. Climate-change believers are mentally defective
JonThm 1 year ago
@JonThm What does it say about trophic changes? How about the effectsof anthropogenically produced CO2 carbon isotope species on species composition in plant communities? You know, the different uptake of different C species by C4 and CAM plants as opposed to C3 plants? How about the various forcings by things such as albido, H2O vapour etc.? And of course lets not forget the potentially devastating effects of clathrate melting? It might be wise to forget high school. AGW is for big people.
uknowispeaksense 1 year ago
There has been no increase in carbon dioxide over last 200 years.
JonThm 1 year ago
@JonThm cite?
Paladiea 1 year ago
Oh, yeah, this is scientific. It's nothing but a whiner's video. Keep on whining. And could you get me another blanket? I'm freezing here.
jacobyte100 1 year ago
Here is a good academic reference for the history of climate change and it's denial
watch?v=2T4UF_Rmlio
For those of us old enough to remember, it was President George Bush senior that began action on global warming back in '88
The denier youth know better if course.
bernzeppi 1 year ago
Another thing we're not told is that the NASA study published in nature did not say that there is no other reason for the "biological markers" to behave as they do, leaving the false impression that there isn't one other than the warming greenman's claiming is happening. Science tells us that at least some plants will bloom early due directly to elevated co2 levels, for instance.
smartalek65 1 year ago
@smartalek65 There is no other reason than warming for hardiness zones to be moving poleward, moron.
johnm1066 1 year ago
@johnm1066 And your point is, nosepicker? Fact is, warming shows nothing of how much, which the satellite data suggests that the surface temperature data IS biased towards warming.
smartalek65 1 year ago
"Corporate giants, many of whom are directly tied in with big oil, and central banks who, far from bankrolling climate change skeptics, are directly invested in the scam of human-induced global warming.
Accusations leveled against global warming skeptics is that they are on the payroll of transnational oil companies, when in fact the opposite is true, oil companies are amongst the biggest promoters of climate change propaganda, emphasized recently by Exxon Mobil's call for a global carbon tax."
Dayversion 1 year ago
@Dayversion "..promoters of climate change propaganda" hahah the biggest pervayor of the "Propaganda" is of course the established international science community. “the leading international network of climate scientists concluded that global warming is 'unequivocal' and that human activity is the main driver. No nationally or internationally recognized organization of scientists holds a dissenting opinion. Not one. The blowhards on FOX don't have peer reviewed studies.
sinistar99 1 year ago
@skydancer365 An alarmist bears no pejorative connotation. For the climate debate, it's someone who thinks that catastrophe is imminent if an extreme course of action isn't taken. The real difference in terms is that denier is used to show contempt and intimidate those who disagree with the notion that science has determined conclusively that human greenhouse emissions significantly and/or catastrophically warm the Earth's climate.
smartalek65 1 year ago
Comment removed
FroggieTerd 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Research Update: Journal of Geophysical Research, paper: "Reconstruction of regional mean sea level anomalies from tide gauges" - Aug 2010.
"The global mean sea level for the period January 1900 to December 2006 is estimated to rise at a rate of 1.56 ± 0.25 mm/yr which is reasonably consistent with earlier estimates, but we do not find significant acceleration"
Six inches of sea level rise per CENTURY, and no acceleration of that trend. The sky isn't falling, Chicken Little.
ttowntom 1 year ago
The Hoax is what you see in the media, and in films like "An Inconvenient Truth". Flooded cities, vast deserts, tremendous hurricanes, etc. All lies, of course. Hurricane activity is at near-record lows...and after 150 years of so-called warming, more than 6X as many people die each year from cold as they do heat.
30 years ago, Hansen told us we had "10 years" to save the planet. 20 years Gore said the same thing. Today...they're still saying the exact same thing. Wake up, people.
ttowntom 1 year ago
"Exxonmobil corp., the world's largest crude oil refiner, supports taxing carbon dioxide as the most efficient way of curbing greenhouse gas emissions, its chief executive said.
"As a businessman, it's hard to speak favourably about any new tax, but a carbon tax strikes me as a more direct, more transparent and more effective approach," Rex Tillerson, CEO of the Irving, Texas based company, said Thursday at the Woodrow Wilson international center for scholars in Washington."
Dayversion 1 year ago
@thesparitan If you knew the origin of the term, as it applies to the AGW debate, you wouldn't look like a fool right now. An ad hominem is a phrase marked by an attack on someone's character. Here, it equates skeptics with the neo-nazis, who deny that the holocaust took place; whereas we skeptics point out that science fails to support the alarmists, the holocaust deniers actually deny the historical fact of the holocaust.
smartalek65 1 year ago
@smartalek65
I usually call them "skeptics" but I've had almost as many complain about that word too. There are those, however, who aren't just skeptical but spew blatant untruths. I have no problem calling THEM deniers. The problem is, I haven't met very many actual skeptics.
Skydancer365 1 year ago
@Skydancer365 I don't have any problem being called a skeptic. I can actually cite the science in the peer-reviewed literature that supports the skepticism. Although I'm not above smart-alecky remarks (hence the handle), I don't have a problem with civil conversation, either. And, as usual, there's many flaws found in this vid, too. You might be surprised at the way you're out-and-out lied to by the side that calls skeptics by pejoratives. Have a nice day.
smartalek65 1 year ago
@smartalek65
I'm actually REALLY, REALLY good at sorting out truth from fact. Mostly because I'm genuinely willing to hear all sides of a case on almost every subject. I know NOBODY else like me in that respect even some who THINK they are.
Skydancer365 1 year ago
@Skydancer365 For instance, could you tell when the v.o. incorrectly told you about the NOAA "study" that involved the 70 "optimally" sited stations? What didn't he tell you? That those 70 stations chosen were sited within urban contamination areas. The chosen stations were given high micro-area ratings, meaning that they had no immediate surrounding contamination, but were located within urban contamination areas, which science says we have no way of accurately adjusting for.
smartalek65 1 year ago
great work greenman!
otipua08 1 year ago
k21desmog, you show the political nature of your video by using the pejorative ad hominem "denier" in reference to AGW's critics.
smartalek65 1 year ago
@smartalek65 Umm do they deny AGW, Yes ok then they are deniers.
you are wrong about that being an ad hominem because he didnt make a claim against deniers character and then said because of that they are wrong, which would have been a fallacy. Example: You are a moron, therefore what ever you say about global warming is wrong, that is a fallacy. But If I was to point out that you are in fact a moron, which you are, then that is not ad hominem, see you fucking moron go learn about logic.
thesparitan 1 year ago
Godddddd why did you take it to partisan politics and WMDs at the end of the video. If you're trying to carry water for the liberal democrats, you're doing a good job. If you're actually trying to save the human race, you fail miserably. SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT RED VS. BLUE POLITICS AND STICK TO FACTS. Or maybe all you care about is winning 1% more elections in the last 200 years the human race has left? Good job, idiot.
MazeleyFanClub 1 year ago
@MazeleyFanClub
Take the Valium. Please.
Trent1492 1 year ago
@MazeleyFanClub Relax and get some help
thesparitan 1 year ago
Yes attack the messager and not the message. Funny how the temperature chart starts in 1950, expecially since everyone at NOAA knows that the temperature in the 1930s were higher than they are today. And as far as money...Realist $2million from exxon, Alarmist $1Billion per year from Uncle Sam
GoreBullWarming 1 year ago
@GoreBullWarming To correct you: 1934 is the hottest year on record in the USA which only comprises 2% of the globe. According to NASA temperature records, the hottest year on record globally is 2005. (Globally, 1934 is the 47th hottest year on record). next denier please....p.s. watch "climate change deniers, stop asking for proof"
phillips78 1 year ago
@phillips78 If most of the world didn't have temperature records back in the 1930s how can they make the claim. Sure, the US only makes up only 2-1/2 percent of the planet, but theat about 10% of the land mass. So how do places like Antartica or even Africa that have very sparce records swamp out the US. It's called "hide the decline"
GoreBullWarming 1 year ago
@GoreBullWarming Over 90% of countries had temp records in the 1930's. Hide the decline was in reference to the decline in tree ring data since 1960, not temps.
phillips78 1 year ago
@phillips78 @phillips78 Look at the map on this page and make the same claim
wapedia(dot)mobi/en/Instrumental_temperature_record. And just how good are the records from these other places, like the USSR and China and Africa?
"hide the decline" was overlaping measured temperature onto tree ring proxi that didn't agree with the author. Thus hiding the decline.
GoreBullWarming 1 year ago
@GoreBullWarming As stated 90% of countries had coverage in 1930's, and by 1950 there were over 3000 stations worldwide.
On the "hide the decline" comment, "Hide the decline" refers to a decline in the reliability of tree rings to reflect temperatures after 1960. what problem do you have with Mann putting actual measured temps on a graph which is more accurate than tree rings after 1960? He didn't hide the fact that he put real temp data on the graph, so what is the issue?
phillips78 1 year ago 2
@phillips78 "climate change deniers, stop asking for proof" Music is kind of boring, no facts and censured. Geeze why whould I want to go there?
GoreBullWarming 1 year ago
@GoreBullWarming You are advertising the video for all those who disagree with you, (which on here is a lot of people) I'm sure the scientist who made it will be grateful.
phillips78 1 year ago
@GoreBullWarming Not to mention the several million the alarmists get from environmental groups, like that bastion of fairness Greenpeace. The IPCC even broke it's own rules how many times by referencing Greenpeace research.
smartalek65 1 year ago
@smartalek65
Exactly WHO are the "alarmists" and how do you define what an "alarmist" is? If you don't want to be called a denialist (or denier), you might want to think about avoiding the use of the word "alarmist".
Skydancer365 1 year ago
Hahaha Glenn Beck would support him. It sure is a good thing people like them are the laughing stock of the scientific community today.
NashvilleKildCountry 1 year ago
What happened to sceptics wanting a "fair and open debate" about climate change? Watts did his own research to challenge the global warming hypothesis. Fine, fair play to him. Now that he presented his findings, they should be responded to in the interest of a "fair and open debate". Trying to get the video responding to his research taken down, is not a fair debate. Either nobody likes being challenged but he just can't handle it when someone does or he has something to hide.
JVbin 1 year ago
Of course weathermen are Government pawns! Let us not forget that Brick Tamland went on to become a top political advisor to the Bush White House. :P
JVbin 1 year ago
If global warming is real? GOOD
Past global warming episodes saw massive growth in life. There's an impending major iceage anyway, we are technically in an iceage NOW. GW will delay a deadly iceage.
.
If global warming is a hoax? BAD
That means we'll have to pay for Co2, the stuff that is produced when we try stay warm & alive. There is an impending major iceage on the way, we wont be able to afford heating, and we wont be able to produce crops in the freezing cold - we'll die.
OZcheckm8 1 year ago
The idiotic location of a thousand official thermometers over the air conditioner condensors in the middle of the hot parking lot full of newly parked cars has NOTHING to do with Heartland. Any fool can see these thermometers are horrible.
w4csc 1 year ago
@acavideo I like the petroleum industry. I think we need more drilling, but not in the deep water. That was insane. The real problem is the correxit. That makes the oil spill 10 times more toxic. Get ready for mutant children, USA.
realscience1 1 year ago
Welll the fact is that psychopaths exist. They are very clever. They rise to the top. They are always conspiring for the hell of it. For kicks, for fun... so of course there are conspiracies. Just because you think there isn't doesn't make it so. These climate weather stations have destroyed the world. They are destroying real climate data. Climate Changers want to destroy the world by manufacturing expensive solar panels and wind systems - anything to put money in the pockets of greedy folk.
realscience1 1 year ago
So,... the weather's changing ?
really !! like it has always !?
what's the point ?
I suspect most people don't deny climate change or global warming - whether it is actually manmade & if so to what extent is more the issue ?!
Likewise whether or not accepted climate models are right & complete is seriously questionable..
admrich 1 year ago 2
Thank God for the CRU email hack. Resist this new religion with Al Gore and David Suzuki as their high priests. Earth's climate is driven by the sun. You cannot stop what the sun will do. CO2 is the gas of life. Do not let politicians fulfill their socialist agendas by redistributing wealth through carbon taxes and technology subsidies. Do not let your leaders steal your money to fix something that doesn't exist. You must resist.
pharoe316 1 year ago
@pharoe316 The sun's activity has not increased since at least 1978 when accurate satellite measurements began; it can't explain the warming we've seen since then. Sorry. I don't care if it explains any past warming.
CO2 traps heat radiation. We've known that for 150 years. Being "the gas of life" (whatever that means) does not negate that. Increasing its concentration by over 35% should theoretically produce a warming effect if all other climate factors stay the same - but they never do.
DeadlyV1RU5 1 year ago
@pharoe316
Go read what those three quotes that the mined from thousands of e-mails actuallty say; try to think for yourself instead of listening to batshit crazy nuts like Glenn Beck and scientists paid by Exxon.
"CO2 is the gas of life. "
...Then go park your car in the garage, leave it running, shut the garage door and enjoy sit there for two hours enjoying the gas of life.
jimbrown257 1 year ago
@jimbrown257
"go park your car in the garage, leave it running, shut the garage door and enjoy sit there for two hours enjoying the gas of life"
.
Eh, if you want to be an activist maybe know what U R talking about.
.
If you gas yourself in your car you die from Carbon Monoxide, & probably sulfur dioxide (the stuff that makes acid rain), Co2 will eventually kill you, but its no way near as bad as the POLLUTION your car makes. Safe Co2 levels are 4x more than current atmospheric levels.
OZcheckm8 1 year ago
@OZcheckm8
Actually the margin of safety is rather higher than that. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is currently 390 ppm, whereas significant adverse effects occur at > 1% (10,000 ppm; about 26 times atmospheric), and the UK HSE has set the long-term exposure limit at 5000 ppm (13 times atmospheric).
RedGreenInBlue 1 year ago
@OZcheckm8
To be rather morbid, I've just calculated (based on a 2007 Toyota Yaris diesel idling at 0.68 L/h) that in a standard single garage, it would take 56 min for CO2 to reach 2% (mild narcosis, hearing impairment), and 228 min to reach 8% (loss of consciousness (LOC) in 10 min). If the engine's CO emissions are maximum permissible under Euro 4, when [CO2] = 8%, [CO] = 530 ppm (CO causes LOC in 2 h at about 800 ppm).
Conclusion: CO2 will get you first - though it's a close-run race.
RedGreenInBlue 1 year ago
I'm wondering if that was part of the rationale for the chosen CO limits. A petrol or diesel engine can hardly avoid emitting CO2, so there's not much point reducing CO emissions any further (from a human toxicity point of view, anyway) if they are already so low that CO2 would reach toxic levels first.
(Enough on this cheerful topic! Back to work...)
RedGreenInBlue 1 year ago
@pharoe316" Earth's climate is driven by the sun...." So every single national science organization in every single industrialized country is wrong and you got it all figured out with a little bit of folksy "wisdom" worthy of grandpa on the beverly hillbilies. Riiight.. No wonder people laugh at deniers. No leaders are trying to steal my money. They're simply wanting some companies to pay for the externalized cost of their polution and have some better air quality standards. oooh scary!
sinistar99 1 year ago
what ever happened to global cooling which obama's science czar said we must develop new technology to melt the ice caps. the tide is turning again people see that climate change is a tool for elitist power grabbers and the trojan horse for global enslavement.
AutoStudent4Life 1 year ago
@AutoStudent4Life What you are describing never happened. Global Cooling was an idea that a few scientists came up with in the early seventies. It was never more than a guess and was never widely accepted. That is UTTERLY different from Climate Change today which is well supported in science and commonly accepted by climate scientists (among many others).
Ranillon 1 year ago
Still no proof that Co2 causes climate change. Still nothing that says climate change is dangerous. Congrats.
Rotpig 1 year ago
@Rotpig
If the ice caps melt enough to raise sea level, a significant ammount of the coast will be underwater. Also, if freshwater and salt water bodies rise enough to mix, it will destroy their ecosystems. Go ask the people in Greenland if their glaciers that have been there for millenia are melting at record rates or not. Better yet, search YT for "greenland melting glaciers" to see videos of it happening. Then tell me why it's really not happening as I'm sure you will still deny it.
jimbrown257 1 year ago
@jimbrown257
But, how do you explain away Glacier Girl, the P-38 LIghtning whos crew went back to Greenland to retrieve 50 years later, to the day, from when it crashed on the ice? The plane was buried under 268 FEET of NEW ICE! Google "Glacier Girl" to find the story. That hole is 268 FEET deep to the plane that crashed right there in 1942! If Greenland were melting, that plane would be sitting ON TOP OF A MELTING ICE SHEET. This observation in SOUTHERN Greenland proves otherwise....
w4csc 1 year ago
@jimbrown257
Those video's you see are of summer melt. The glaciers dont melt in winter.
.
Its like me telling you your freezer is broken by videoing your icecream melting, hours after it was taken out of the freezer.
.
Those glaciers have melted every summer for AT LEAST 2,000 years - there's proof too: Hawaii now sells Glacier melt water that runs in a current under the sea which is 2,000 years old. Look it up, dont be so naive
OZcheckm8 1 year ago
@OZcheckm8 bullsghit i am fr4om hawaii there is no such thing I am well versed in what u are talking about and u are straight up WRONG. in fact this water is NOT BEING sold in hawaii. what peopole are talking abut is deep cold water harvesting for cooling. Hawaii is also looking at using deep sea water for energy. not for bottled water. there is no glacier water in hawaii. we are in the pacific induction zone with an active volcano. are u a retard or what?
TrollsParade 1 year ago
@TrollsParade
HahahahAAHAHAHA LOOSER!! You live in Hawaii & dont even know about it. Thanks for opening your mouth & confirming you're a dip shit.
Look at Hawaii's biggest exported bottled water, & see where it comes from LOL. Maybe you are a real retard & dont realise it yet LOL!!
OZcheckm8 1 year ago
@jimbrown257 yep and a couple of days ago another peice of ice broke of 4 times the size of manhatten almost a quarter of the ice cap and half the size of greenland. also there hasa been global mass flooding and droughts for the last 2 weeks even in russia. even where i live one of the wettest spots on earth.
TrollsParade 1 year ago
Dood, did you graduate from the textbook denier school? 'Greenland they used to grow grapes there is a good record' of historical global temperatures?
meercatdotcom 1 year ago
AGW, al gore and all promotions of this scam are the crock of the century.
Alarmists are trying to re-write history by denying the Medieval Warming Period.
Greenland was much warmer, they used to grow grapes there. The 1990's were not "the warmest decade EVER!"
Even the 1930's were warmer.
31,000 scientists know man-made global warming is a lie:
~petitionproject
Do NOT trade your freedom to the government for a lie under cap n' trade.
co2isgoodal 1 year ago
@co2isgoodal There is no evidence that the medival warming period was a global event. It affected some regions near the north Atlantic. The evidence shows most of the rest of the plant was cooler than today.
kcdl 1 year ago
@kcdl Co2 Science website. Look it up.
Rotpig 1 year ago
@co2isgoodal How is cap n trade going to restrict my freedoms? Talk about "Alarmist!" hahahah. Too bad a petition is not a scientific document. It reminds me of when the nazis had 100 "scientists" put together a paper called "100 scientists against Einstein" stating relativity was a crock. Einstien said, "If they had an argument, one would have sufficed." Every nationally recongnized scientific organization in the world agrees and no dumbass "petition" substitutes for actual evedence.
sinistar99 1 year ago
Comment removed
legless40 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dr Miskolczi showed that the solution to a differential equation for the greenhouse effect developed in 1922 by Arthur Milne, wrongly assumed an infinitely thick atmosphere. In re-solving this equation a new term and also a new law of physics have been proposed setting an upper limit to the greenhouse effect. Dr Miskolczis theory indicates that any warming from elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide will eventually be offset by a change in atmospheric moisture content
legless40 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
legless40 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DHMO is the guilty one!
Dr Miskolczi showed that the solution to a differential equation for the greenhouse effect developed in 1922 by Arthur Milne, wrongly assumed an infinitely thick atmosphere. In re-solving this equation a new term and also a new law of physics have been proposed setting an upper limit to the greenhouse effect. Dr Miskolczis theory indicates that any warming from elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide will eventually be offset by a change in atmospheric moisture content
judomagyar 1 year ago 2
The relationship between climate and sunspot activity has been well established, going back thousands of years. Recently the sun has gone 'quiet' indicating an upcoming cooling period - as has occurred many times in the past.
However, the so-called 'hockey stick' temperature curve appears to indicate that excess heating is occurring. My concern is the veracity of the data used in this graph. We might be missing the real future problem even though it is being clearly flagged up!
CombatRocks 1 year ago
@CombatRocks yes the sun is quiet. All the other reason we normally get global warming are absent and yet there it is. This is ONE reason why we think it is human caused by humans. Also Carbon isotope ratios of our CO2 emission.
The hockey stick graph has been redone several times using data even deniers haven't critisised and it still shows warming.
kcdl 1 year ago
@kcdl My point is that humans are one possible cause. However, I have not seen sufficiently good evidence that confirms this. There are many other potential causes which could explain recent temp increases. I understand that current thinking is moving away from CO2 and towards methane - a much more likely cause of rapid temp increases. We need to see all the evidence from all possible sources to make a proper assessment.
CombatRocks 1 year ago
@CombatRocks Do you think we should try and do something about it just in case? This is the main thing that concerns me. Science is always up for debate. What bothers me about deniers is a lot of them take the view "the science isn't settled so we should do nothing." which is utterly riduculous for several reasons. Even apart from the risk mitigation side of things there are many reason why humans should themselves off fossil fuels beside global warming.
kcdl 1 year ago 2
@kcdl Absolutely. But I think that there are too many people trying to stop, or reverse, climate change. That is ridiculous - it's akin to stopping the tides! I think we should prepare for the consequences which we can already see occurring in some parts of the world. We should be spending money on mitigating against drought, famine and enforced relocation. Trying to lower global temperatures in a short timescale is utterly pointless, especially when the jury is still out!!
CombatRocks 1 year ago
no need to ban this... theres nothing here that contradicts wot climate deniers r saying.
YoutubingForSuccess 1 year ago
The Minoan warm period was WARMER than today, the Roman warm period was WARMER than today, and the Medieval warm period was WARMER than today. So much for " the hottest year on record " ...................
uboat21 1 year ago
@uboat21 The Minoan warm period was WARMER than today... A) no they weren't and b) these warm periods were regional and explained by other factors. What's happening now is global and not explained by other factors... therefor obviously to EVERY SINGLE GD SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATION ON EARTH caused by human activity.
sinistar99 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Whoever made this video needs andeditor. "The very same people who told you weapons of mass destruction are real, are telling you climate change, is not". Uh, yeah, I know what you MEANT, but in a literal interpretation of what you said, you are saying that weapons of mass destruction dont exist anywhere.
SANPH 1 year ago
The lack of attention to that kind of detail kind of irks me and makes the integrity of the spoken word in the rest of the video seem questionable. Just saying. Get an editor, a second set of eyes and ears, anything.
SANPH 1 year ago
Comment removed
SANPH 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This guy is a MORON. It's been getting COLDER since 1998. This whole scam is an effort to fund a banker-controlled world government, with no elections, no auditing for what they do with the TRILLIONS they expect to extract from us, etc. It has NOTHING to do with saving the planet. If it did, the LAST thing on the list of things to tax, would be Co2, which plants benefit from more of.
These "scientists" denied the Medieval Warming Period, when it was hotter than it is now, and Co2 was lower.
joygarner 1 year ago
The issue in climate change as far as I can tell is this. Is there something significant going on that is caused by humans and is it an issue. When one looks at a geologically significant data set - Millions of years - there does not appear to be anything going on that has not happened a number of times previously and is not predictable to occur at this time. Check out Dr Bob Carter's videos on YouTube
gpaldrich 1 year ago
@gpaldrich The different is other warming period were caused by cyclic phenomena, it other word the things that caused the temperature to go up went away of their own accorded and the earth was allowed to cool again. The current warming is happen faster than previous warming periods and this time it is caused by us, there is a lot of evidence for that. That is a huge difference.
Dr Bob Carter works for oil companies that is a huge conflict of interest I'd say.
kcdl 1 year ago
I find it funny that you ignorant obama nut sucking libs have chosen to instead of debate with me and show your "facts" on climate change you just vote down my comments....LOL PUSSIES
boxingboycow 1 year ago
NUTS!
Disassociator 1 year ago
So Watts is middle aged. I thought from his websites and comments that he was a young immature lad. I was wrong, he's not so young.
sout49 1 year ago
the funny thing to me is that there has been 7 ice ages, 6 of them prior to human life on earth.....suddenly we caused this one thats coming, just as suddenly we are going to stop it roflmfao....if it's true seeing as their studies are half assed and only done in certain portions of the world....mind you not the largest cold weather nothern land mass...lol bunch of idiots support the epa and the un climate group
boxingboycow 1 year ago
@boxingboycow look at the climate denial crock of the week video about ice ages
Unclesamslair 1 year ago
can you link it I can not find it anywhere?
boxingboycow 1 year ago
still waiting on that link? I really would like to see it
boxingboycow 1 year ago
@boxingboycow You are a hoot! The US Supreme Court has given an agency of the "Federal Government" its marching orders.
Do you have even a vague clue to the timescales involved with previous climate changes? Nope, you don't.
TRUMPHENT 1 year ago
lol if everything I have heard from "science" the time scale for our clomate to drastically change, has already started! But as for exact dates lol no but neither do the monkeys building models! As for me being a hoot well dude I try to have fun with what I do but hey its hard to have fun when you have one side not even willing to debate because *slams fist* "dammit we are right" even without absolute proof....
boxingboycow 1 year ago
@boxingboycow Who are scientists going to debate? You? Climate modelers can tell you more about their programs shortcomings than you. Those same modelers have high levels of proficiency in mathematics and something called physics. I doubt you can claim same.
NOAA uses as many as 12 models to track hurricanes and I never hear even a whisper of complaint from anyone when it updates a course change of a storm.
Write your code, run your data, publish and then make your argument.
TRUMPHENT 1 year ago
how about the 30,000 climatologist who are sueing al gore over "Global Warming"? not me I am just a guy worried about being taxed the fuck out of for something that has yet to be proven
boxingboycow 1 year ago
@boxingboycow, that has been debunked, of all those 30,000 "scientist" there are actualy only a couple real ones and have said that their names have been used without their knowledge.
and the scandal of some scientists "making up numbers" it was shown that the guy who made up those reports wasnt even a scientist...
Darusdei 1 year ago
Neither are 2/3 of the pople on the un climate board, but we are going to blindly follow what they say!?
boxingboycow 1 year ago
@boxingboycow, dont pull stastistics from ur ass...
Darusdei 1 year ago
lol ok sorry 64.out of 100 are not scientist, sorry my bad....your a dick you know that! do me a favor? I wont pull numbers from my ass if you pull your head from yours??
boxingboycow 1 year ago
@boxingboycow Choose your poison and have at it. Just out of idle curiosity, who is going to pay for the war in Iraq? Your logic would have a tax cut to pay for it.
The Oregon Petition has never filed its fanciful suit against anyone (and will never). Your government has too many real scientists on its payroll. Don't ever listen to a warning from NOAA about tornadoes or hurricanes ever again.
Once again, publish your research, get yer Nobel Prize, go to Disney World.
TRUMPHENT 1 year ago
@boxingboycow 30,000 climatologist? Hahahahaha. Really where are they? Can you show us a link to a cort transcript? Anything? Let's see their peer reviewed studies. It's a bunch of denier crap. Yes you are stupid to question science without any real reason to do so. Go get your doctorate degree in climatology or a related science publish your thesis have it peer reviewed or STFU because those who DID do that are in aggreement.
sinistar99 1 year ago 2
@sinistar99 Stupid to question theories that will cost the people of this world trillians of dollars? You're a fucking idiot. You're a lamb who only follows.
boxingboycow 11 months ago
@boxingboycow, have you hit your head or are you just stupid?
Darusdei 1 year ago
why am I stupid because i question science that is not complete?
boxingboycow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion of anthropogenic climate change since the American Association of Petroleum Geologists adopted its current position in 2007. Still, it is possible they are wrong. So what are the risks if they are? What if they are not? Google video, "How it all ends." It will be the first one. It is the first of a series of videos to help you understand the risks involved so you can make a cost/benefit analysis,
Staranand 1 year ago
JUST FOUND THIS:
Hottest January in UAH satellite record
Human-caused global warming easily overwhelms much-hyped "cold snap"
February 5, 2010
"The global-average lower tropospheric temperature anomaly soared to +0.72 deg. C in January, 2010. This is the warmest January in the 32-year satellite-based data record."
To see the graph of the "UAH Globally Averaged Satellite-Based Temperature of the Lower Atmosphere, 1979-2010"
Search:
Hottest January in UAH satellite record
goog2k 2 years ago
the global warming cultists also believe the end of the world is coming in 5 years from global warming. they remind me of the bum standing on the corner with "the end is near" sign but taxing us will solve the hoax to save us again from the end of the world.
SCOBMAN 2 years ago
Come on, who are these experts that claim the world is ending in five years? You're claiming that others are saying outlandish things but you're using lies to support your bullshit.
vadimcream 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Recommended video lecture:
'The Biggest Control Knob'
tinyurl com/ybng2vu
pseudotruth 2 years ago
For those who believe in GLOBAL WARMING,
would you prefer "GLOBAL COOLING"?
if NOT,
How do you plan on (sciensts or us humans) manipulating the weather so we only have climate we LIKE and consider NORMAL and acceptable throughtout the Earth
The ELITE would have all of us believe that the answer is simple...just
CAP & TRADE...
Now if ANYONE thinks that this si the solution then we are in deep trouble!
Tomuch4yoo 2 years ago
The idea is not to control the weather to our own personal best. It's quite the contrary, to stop our control/affect completely. once we stop emitting carbon dioxide we let the environment take its own course. That is if we are not too late.
BIoodBath 2 years ago
Tomuch4yoo, The ELITE is not driving the global warming cause, if it was we would see far more action from both the U.S. government and more importantly the major corporations that unfortunately have a stranglehold on our economic decisions. Cap and trade is by no means the solution to this problem, and you do a disservice to your own integrity by propagating these uneducated falsities... And the only thing that is "too much" about "yoo" is your unnecessary use of caps.
vadimcream 1 year ago
wait so the bilderburg group is not the elite in America? How about the trilateral commision? two groups same origin, 77% democrat....
boxingboycow 1 year ago
@boxingboycow So the scientific acadamies of of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada,Caribbean, China, France, Ghana, Germany, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, India, Japan, Kenya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, New Zealand, Russian Academy of Sciences, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Tanzania, Turkey, Uganda, The Royal Society of the United Kingdom, United States, Zambia, Zimbabwe --all part of a big hoax. Right! hahahah!
sinistar99 1 year ago 3
@sinistar99 ROFL yeah dumbshit, it was proven to be manufactured. Guess blindly following is your way of life, not mine. Dont ever assume you and anyone of your ilk will ever have the power to MAKE me live your life. Global warming is bullshit, the world climate changes all the time and has done it many times before human industrialisation. Deal with it pussy, but stay the fuck out of my life with it.
boxingboycow 11 months ago
@boxingboycow oh yeah sure, go ahead denying the obvious. Just don't come crying when oil prices skyrocket, when more wars are fought for oil, food and water, and millions of people flee from newly forming deserts and areas that flood yearly to your area, just because we couldn't stop spewing CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the air.
Do the research. Read the papers. Those ARE the consequences if we do nothing. It's as simple as that.
pantheratigris86 11 months ago 17