Climates change as they are cyclic. There's no proof that "global warming" has caused spring to come sooner. During the last 2 billion years the Earth's climate has alternated between a frigid "Ice House" and a steaming "Hot House". Where did man play a role in that? If you research it, you'll find that the same scientists say that its from changes in the earths orbit, changes in the sun's intensity and even volcanic eruptions, not from farting cows or SUV's.
Am i the only one who notices that the horses in the thumbnail were arabian, so that might have something to do with the fact TheYoungTurks are reporting on it...
@DinoAvenger14 or you know, arabian horses are widely regarded as being superior to other horse breeds, and are by far the most popular kind, so when you type in horse you will probably come up with an arabian.
seriously anyone who thinks that TYT has some secret turkish agenda is dangerously paranoid.
Cenk..Please note that people are not denying that there is global warming...What a lot of scientists are saying is that they don't think it's 'MAN MADE'...They believe that the world is just going through another one of it's many historic climate changes....and this period that we are living in now, is just another one of those natural periods of earth changes!
Nothing in nature remains the same forever, nature is constantly changing!
@12235117657598502586 actually there are a lot of people denying global warming, not in the scientific community, but among the general populace. when people hear that scientists are debating about global warming, some people think that means that they're debating whether it's occurring or not, instead of debating what's causing it.
@Cuddlebunzzzz - You're quite right and thanks for your clarification.
I forgot to include the key word 'debate'. However, at this stage in the global warming debate, I tend to side with those scientists who believe that mankind's intensive demands on our planet is 'contributing' towards a SPEEDING-UP of natures 'change cycles'...But the cycles would still happen whether not mankind existed or not!
I think it will happen anyway no matter what - question is will it be sooner or later?
Of course the equinox is unaffected...nothing short of a truly major impact, a major gravitational disturbance, or something not known to science could change it...
I think Global warming is a scam. I mean, this could just be a cycle our earth is going through. The ice caps have been melting long before cars were even made. Our climate in the past year has gone up and down, up and down, not up constantly.
@HiLRoYpwns oh my god are you that ignorant? lol Do you been up and down because of the SEASON? lol hahahaha thats pretty dumb dude, you gotta admit....
No humans are the most powerful creation, humans are so smart and amazing it's just everything they do turns out to be one big fuck up. THINGS ARE THE WAY THEY ARE FOR A REASON, not by chance.
LONDON (Reuters) - The world's floating ice is in "constant retreat," showing an instability which will increase global sea levels, according to a report published in Geophysical Research Letters on Wednesday.
NORTH POLE ICE-FREE BY 2050?
The study did not shed new light on how soon the North Pole may be ice-free in summer, which many climate experts say could happen by 2050, perhaps even earlier.
James Screen and Ian Simmonds, of the University of Melbourne, said the rise in surface temperatures in the Arctic in the past 20 years had been more than double the global average
Dr Screen said white ice reflects a lot of sunlight, but as it melts due to man-made warming from greenhouse gas emissions, the dark water that is exposed absorbs more heat, which in turn, melts more ice, and so on
Report: Despite Global Action, Biodiversity Is Declining
In a study published in Science, a team of scientists and environmentalists from around the world assessed the state of global biodiversity and found that it has been in steady decline. Human beings rely on a healthy, diverse planet too, and when the Earth suffers, so do we
RESTON, Va., March 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. government says it is funding 17 projects to better understand future climate change conditions and their effects on fish and other wildlife.
Officials said the projects include studies of alterations in Florida's ecosystems, potential impacts on Great Lakes fish, sea-level rise impacts on San Francisco Bay marshes, and the effects of melting glaciers on Alaska's freshwater coastal systems.
@Niightversionn Quit impersonating me all over youtube, Spitfiremacx AKA N ii ghtversionn Nigh tt versionn Knigh tt vision Nigtversionn Nightver ss ion, Nigh ttt versionn Nightversio m Nightverslon, Nightversio nnn, etc.. Stalker, impersonator, global warming DENIER. What an imbecile
NO CENK they didn't problem is that Global Warming is a screen for buy more expensive stuff now.
The real danger of GW started with the revolutionary changes of Attomic energy, more energy, more industries, we're pretty much fucked now so don't worry about it, just DON'T POLLUTE.
Yes, Cenk, the vernal and autumnal equinoxes are still at the same time of the year; it's not based on the weather, but on the position of the earth in its revolution around the sun. Your birthday is still on the vernal equinox...sadly, I don't think you were ever balanced ;) Delusions of grandeur? Not the ones that I have from being born on Jan 1.
CLIMATE CHANGE: Snow Cover Turning to Lakes in the Himalayas
By Stephen Leahy
UXBRIDGE, Canada, May 7, 2009 (IPS) - As climate change takes hold, even the mighty Himalayas and Hindu Kush mountain ranges are now losing their snow and ice.
These are the world's greatest repositories of snow and ice outside of the polar regions, and yet they may melt away in just 20 to 30 years, leaving more than a billion people desperately short of water
You're 69 year old stalker. Youre a global warming DENIER with no peer-reviewed science so all you can do is play silly games. Further proof global warming deniers are frauds
GREAT BARRIER REEF OIL SPILL HITS RENOWNED NATURE SANCTUARY
Oil from a huge Chinese ship which grounded in the Great Barrier Reef has hit a world-renowned nature sanctuary, officials said Wednesday, raising fears for seabirds and baby turtles now hatching there.
SCIENTISTS INVESTIGATE ECUADORS RECEDING GLACIERS Andean glaciers are losing volume at an unprecedented rate, with some declining by 40% over the past 50 years. At more than 5,000m (16,400ft) high, tropical glaciers are particularly sensitive to a changing climate. BBC
@Niightversionn *****WOW Is that why you like to impersonate people who talk about the problem of global warming all over youtube Spitfiremacx? You're a lame 69 year old GLOBAL WARMING DENIER impersonating me all over youtube aka N ii ghtversionn Nightvers l ionn Nigh tt versionn Knigh tt vision Nigtversionn Nightver ss ion, Nigh ttt versionn Nightversio m Nightverslon, Nightversio nnn, etc.. Stalker, impersonator, global warming denier. What an imbecile
Besides, any sane American will gladly pay more for energy to get off of foreign oil.
Fighting clean energy initiatives is madness, even if you're under the ridiculous impression that almost every single climate scientist around the World is in on this absurdly impossible conspiracy.
@sdrawkcabgnipytmi no NO FAIL I will not gladly pay extra to get off of "foreign" oil, I will pay extra for energy ONLY if we get off of "OIL" end of story.... not "oh well getting off of foreign oil we can get on our own oil and we'll be self sustained" no fail. screw that.. screw oil, screw the oil industry. just..no.... we got better things to develope here. lets move into a new age with resources just like we did with political correctness and everything else.
@sdrawkcabgnipytmi then you weren't paying attention. I DON"T WANT TO DRILL FOR OIL ON OUR SOIL! or in our waters. so there. I refuse to pay for oil end of story.
I was talking about getting off of foreign oil and onto alternative energies, not about drilling on American soil and paying more for that. I agree with you.
@sdrawkcabgnipytmi then what you need to say is "get off of oil" not "get off of foreign oil" people keep saying this thinking its a given. but others interpret it just as it sounds...get off of FOREIGN oil. when politicians say this they are talking about reducing foreign oil consumption and increasing our own oil consumption. but if you say "use alternative energies" or "we need to get off of oil" it comes across better. :) just a friendly tip
all the corporations who stand to profit from the CO2 fear mongering. Such as Goldman Sachs, who will be operate market
by which all the cap-and-trade trades are done. They stand to profit trillions of dollars over time from it and have a vested interest in getting legislation passed and promoting a fear? of something that is not based on solid science.
Telling me how much Goldman Sachs or Al Gore will make off of climate change is utterly irrelevant. When making such large scale changes to any part of our economy there will always be winners and losers.
The only thing that is relevant is whether or not climate change is real and man made or not. In the scientific community, there is simply no debate on those issues.
And when people are cult-like and fanatical about an issue, that usually tells me they're not thinking clearly or rationally. The supporters of AGW are as bad in this case, if not worse, than the deniers.
The Associated Press claims that the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since Bill Clinton's second inaugural. But after it was discovered that NASA's James Hansen, Gore's chief scientific ally, had been fudging the numbers,
the agency was forced to correct its data. The 10 warmest years turn out to be, in descending order: 1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938 and 1939.
When did the health of the planet suddenly get a price tag. Personally, I don't care how much it costs or how much big companies profit or how much gas goes up, if it helps keep the planet healthy, it's fine with me. Because after all, when our oceans no longer have any fish in them, all of our fresh water is polluted to undrinkability, our crops won't grow and we all have cancer, money wont to matter that much... will it?
@RomeoMD25 SO what.I am very vocal in my opposition to microsoft I think they have an unfair advantage in the market and very monoploistic polocies.Yet I have an investment portfolio thru 401k's and other investment devices that includes stock in microsoft.Why because it make money and I need that to feed my children and secure my retirement.Your statemnt proves nothing other than gore has smart investments
Of course, big companies don't want to stop creating as much waste as the want and dumping it where ever they feel like at the time... it costs time and money to dispose of things properly. They don't give half a crap about what happens to the planet. They absolutely have to be regulated on how much waste and pollution they're causing.
"Carbon levels APPEAR to LAG temperatures - that means it is NOT a cause!!"
That is load of shit and is used as an anti-global warming propaganda tool.
I can't explain the reasons for this in a You Tube comments section, but if you give a shit about the truth, this video does a very good job at explaining it: watch?v=hWJeqgG3Tl8
Carbon trading is projected to be a multi-trillion business. when there is that much money in the pot, you can't trust anyone that has an interest in it. If the U.N. could ever be trusted this is an obvious wakeup call for those that cannot think for themselves.
The U.N. is no longer, if ever, a group to follow blindly.
Goldman Sachs spent more money lobbying for the carbon tax than they spent lobbying against banking reform. They expect to make a? trillion dollars in 10 years off the energy derivatives market which will be the next bubble
@RomeoMD25 I am not a climatoligist or scientist in any way but im guessing u r not either.And yes the majority of scientists in this field DO AGREE that we are causing global warming maybe they are wrong and the minority is right.But to say its a powergrab for world leaders to agree with the overwhelming number of scientists and science is foolish.I can show you lots of reports on global warming being pure myth.Most of them were funded by exxon
Global Warming is happening, whoever doesn't believe that is an idiot. Whether it be a natural phenomenon or human made or both, it doesn't matter. The fact is, it IS happening and we have to do all we can to prevent it from getting any worse. Otherwise we're all going to be screwed.
The National Aeronautic and Space Agency (NASA) has determined Mars, Pluto, Jupiter, and the largest moon of Neptune warmed at the same time the Earth recently warmed.
Two hundred million years ago, when dinosaurs walked the Earth, the average carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere was 1800 ppm, five times higher than today.
@RomeoMD25 Funny that you leave out the planets that cooled over the same period. Most heating/cooling is due to processions of planets (as in every single case you mentioned) and the resulting change in albedo.
Who cares if C02 was 1800ppm 200 million years ago. None of our crops would grow in that climate, and we'd be extinct. Seems like that exactly what you're cheering for.
@codediporpal Agreed, were not dinosaurs, our health is incredibly fragile and were the only species that have agriculture. We also care about the deaths of other species. Nature doesn't care. Even if we didn't go extinct it would still cause the deaths of millions us and other species. Are we willing to let nature just take it's course and kill us off? I don't think so... I'm not just going to sit back and watch people destroy the planet when we could be doing something about it. Futile or not.
No serious person disputes the fact that global temperatures are rising. And I don't think anyone would dispute that these temperature changes have ecological impacts. The real debate is whether human behavior is influencing the rise in temperatures and by how much.
No, there is no real debate within the scientific community about humans being a major cause. There's just a lot of propaganda out there to make us think there is.
I'm sure it is just that simple and you have a better grasp of the science that the IPCC and the climatology community. Please....
As far as propoganda is concerned, Koch and Exxon have spent over $50 million financing non-peer reviewed works by scientists outside their realm of expertise. Greenpeace did a great investigation on that topic. Not to say there hasn't been some misinformation on both sides, but let's not kid ourselves.
Where exactly did I suggest that I "have a better grasp of the science that the IPCC and the climatology community?" Please... practice your reading comprehension.
I made the claim that the vast majority of legitimate climate scientists agree that anthropogenic climate change is real. The IPCC fully agrees with this. The propaganda is coming from non climate scientist sources, and has been overwhelmingly anti-anthropogenic climate change.
more and more scientists are coming out and telling you that it is a scam. That there is no real science in it. It's Scaryence. "Scare Science." Doom and gloom. So they came up with a plan.
What if the people ask for proof? "Just tell them that all the Scientist agree that it is real, and they are smarter then
them, so they need just accept it. Any Scientists that say it's not real are just kooks, or bought off by big oil.
Then we really don't disagree on anything. I assumed since you replied to my comment that your, "there's no real debate" was anti-warming. Though 97% of climatologists agree humans to be a major cause, there's still some debate about how much of an impact we have and how much is cyclical.
That's what I gather anyway, but I don't do weather. I can barely understand a 5 day forecast.
Well as far as I've seen/read the recent increase is almost entirely anthropogenic. I certainly do agree that our ability to predict the scale of the consequences is somewhat limited.
I don't really understand why you brought up weather. That has nothing to do with climate change.
"it's hard to say whether these increases are definitely unprecedented due to the very brief climactic record" How brief do you believe this record to be?
@NathanielFaunce Let's see... C02 is a greenhouse gas, without which the Earth would be frozen solid. CO2 is up 20% in the last 50 years, and the increase almost exactly matches the amount of C02 from fossil fuel burning and deforestation. Yeah, human behavior probably has nothing to do with it.
Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation. It's hard to say whether these increases are definitely unprecedented due to the very brief climactic record. I'm not really doubting we have an impact on the climate, I'm just trying to be a fair devil's advocate. Perhaps a greater controversy though is our ability to predict the consequences of warming. Although this could go both ways: either not as bad or worse than science predicts.
@NathanielFaunce Except that is like debating whether evolution is real or the earth is more than 10,000 years old. Science has a general consensus on all of those with only a few radical scientists dissenting. Could they be right? Sure they could, but the smart bet is to take stock in what almost all of them agree on.
Cenk, it isn't whether global warming is a fact or not, because it is. The argument is whether we're causing it, what degree we're causing it, and if we can do anything to change it. The answer is no, evident by how cult-like it's become, and how political and ridiculously fraudulent it's become, with con artists like Gore making literally billions off of it. At least market schemes like Cap and Trade sure as hell won't change it.
@seanlaca NOW WAIT JUST A MINUITE.U R right global warming is a fact but ther are many including senators congressman and supposed news anchors who deny that it even exists at all.They call it the Global Warming HOAX as if there were not undenyiable proof that the earth IS getting warmer.I agree with you that the debate should be about wheather mankind is causing global warming and other enviromental effects.But right now half the pop belives its a myth because of misinformation.
@seanlaca I don't see how it follows that if A is fervently believed in, then it is wrong -- Especially since A is fervently believed in because it's believers assume that it will affect them negatively. Most people fervently believe that if you cut their head off they will die, therefore they are adverse to getting their head cut off. Does their belief and fear of it make it non-existent?
Because when you follow the money trail, particularly in politics, that will usually give you the answer whether something is a fraud. At worse, AGW is a scientific sham perpetrated to support a political agenda and market scheme. At best, it exaggerates scientific facts in order to support a political agenda and market scheme. Even if we take the best case, it's crystal clear that global warming is either not as critical as is claimed or there's nothing much we can do about it.
@shipoopi92 There was a ice age before humans with our awful co2 so yes it does happen and no its not because of humans. People want to believe its our fault because they can do something about that but they are helpless when it comes to controlling the sun and our planet. Horse farts are bad for the planet so environuts should be happy every time life is killed.
@Flagan65 Thats your opinion. I believe that it is man-made but since scientists haven't proven if it is man-made or not both are logical explanations and i would support whatever scientists come up with.
@shipoopi92 Then why was there climate change before humans made their appearance on earth? I read a NASA article about the upper atmosphere collapsing and the NASA scientists have no idea whats going on. They thought at first it was co2 but the numbers didn't add up.
@Flagan65 Well there is more than one way an ice age can happen. The obliquity and orbit shape of the planet, position of the continents, volcanoes, and even greenhouse gases (which will cause fresh water in the glaciers to enter the oceans and possibly stop the ocean currents which distribute heat around the world)could possibly cause one but like i said before scientists haven't yet proved it yet.
March 21st. is the first day of spring. Cenk sticks in a way to get a lot more presents on his Happy Birthday. You deserve it man, cause you roll hard.
Oh, and Sorry about the spring thing. I love horses, and caterpillars.
I do think that global warming is a real problem, but I'm also pretty sure that the spring equinox (relative position of the sun to our equator) is constantly changing albeit extremely slowly, not because of increasing temperatures, but because the year is not exactly 365 days, which is why we have leap years, which however don't cover for all of the difference.
But it probably is getting a lot warmer, just not because of spring moving.
Also, Venus could have once been like the Earth (evidence through water errosion, ice, etc.), but as a result of green house gases and global warming, it is the 'hell' it is today. With this came predictions for Earth's fate.
The equinox is the sun's apparant path through the sky. At the equinoxes (there's 2), the sun reachest it's lowest point and its highest point in the sky. At the lowest point (winter) the days after become longer, and at the higest, the days after become shorter.
Oh my god he's using the OVER 9000 "scientists" now. Isn't that cute? It's like they think this is important news that nobody has heard before and completely debunked it as the dishonest manipulation it is.
@playerwithfaith You seemed to have missed the logical and factual connections he made to the established effects of global warming. Global warming => higher temperatures => "spring" moving => affects the migration of birds => affects the number of catipillars increase due to lack of pop. control => more injested by horses => miscarriages due to naturally occuring chemicals in normally controlled catipillar populations. Your welcome. Try to pay attention next time.
global warming: especially the upcoming Cap & Trade legislation. Goldman wants this bill Not for altruistic reasons, not to save the planet, but to systematically cheat the public out of trillions by managing this new mechanism for speculation.
@RomeoMD25 I feel bad for you. At the very least, the human race should find alternative energy sources. Because I don't want to be around when oil runs out and humanity collapses. We need to use renewable energy now, otherwise people will die and wars will be fought over the remaining barrels. Global warming aside, humanity is fucked if we do nothing.
Obama wont bite the hand that feeds? him...and by "the hand" i mean the bankers
What do you think? Will Goldman Sachs and other banks involved in carbon offset trade (they already have an OTC future market set up for this) be able to impose this global tax, even if AGW has been proved to be a fraud?
The vernal equinox is a celestial phenomenon. It is determined by the sun in relation to the earth. We have equal parts of light and dark in March and in September (Autumnal Equinox). While this is part of what makes for Spring another part is the warming of the soil and this triggers all sort of plant and animal activity. Spring will not change as a calander event, but it always was a relative phenomena in seasonal change. Of course it will get earlier as the climate warms.
I think Cenk missed the point completely. Skeptics aren't all arguing that the climate isn't warming up, it's the cause that's being debated. It could be higher sunspot rates, higher Co2 level, etc. Pick what you want, just think for yourself and go after the truth.
Problem is virtually all the data shows it's caused by man. The panel set up by the UN with thousands of scientists have all shown data that carbon emissions by man have caused temperatures and climate change.
But it simply does not matter anymore, the changes that we need to be in place will not happen because of warming deniers. The frozen methane in the polar caps is already melting which will cause a runaway warming scenario that can not be reverted.
Ah yeah but change was never an option.. The deniers are just a symptom, if they hadn't been here we would've come up with another excuse. We've known about the necessity of conservation for decades, and we've never once responded appropriately. There are issues like the plummeting fish stocks or the decay of our forests that are much more immediate problems. And you don't even hear about them on the news.
People will always choose short term prosperity over long term necessity.
@megamarsvin You got that right. And you know why of course right? Money! We will never solve these problems until we design a better way to deal with the wants and needs of the population. Money was an ok way to deal with scarcity 50 years ago, but it really is no longer valid. Its just in our heads now. So we need to ditch the monetary system and understand that what you do is for the benefit of everyone. Fantasy, I know, but a guy can dream :)
I remember reading an article written by a famous scientist who said that we are "past the tipping point". It amazes me that every scientist, except for the 5% who work for Exxon Mobil, agrees that global warming is major problem and is a result of our behavior, and yet it continues to be dismissed! One of the problems is that people believe that god will take care of it. Bachman said god saved the planet 2,000yrs ago! This TOTAL dismissal of facts is ridiculous.
I knew a Climate Denier preacher would show up in response to Cenk's comments. Anyone who bothers to look at the extensive history behind the science and the massive scientific majority that favor human caused Global Warming would realize the nutjobs who deny it are motivated to deny reality by either political goals are outright insanity.
Though it doesn't help how certain well-funded think tanks keep spreading misinformation and deceive these desperate fools.
That's the problem. These people will NOT read the books and scientific articles. They listen to Glen Beck and Sean Hannity, who are not educated, and who are both very religious. Remember, these are the same clowns who claimed that global warming was disproved because it snowed for a day in the south
When confronted with problems such as this, people rely upon the most simplistic of answers such as "God will take care of it" "I'll pray" and "I don't believe".
Global Warming fantasies that the earth is becoming one giant microwave heated up by man"s pernicious and insatiable industrial development is of course ridiculous. The only consensus
that exists on climate change is that if you believe anything the UN or Al Gore says, you are probably a moron
No, retard, my knowledge on the subject comes from YEARS and YEARS and YEARS of research, speaking with the scientists and working with environmental conservation parties.
Ridiculous? No, you pretending like you have ANY fucking clue what you are talking about is ridiculous. I want the names of the articles and books, who wrote them and what their role in the scientific community is that disapprove global warming. Come on, dipshit, post them. I'm really curious to see.
Do the math. That is? nearly 40,000 worldwide scientists finally speaking out,
and more every single day. Al Gore has a whole whopping 26 to 52 UN "scientists" drafting the media reports for their climate change hoax. Those are the only reports you hear on the news, and many of the IPCC scientists don't agree at all with the UN reports. Some have even resigned over this.
A hoax? Yeah, yeah, I know just like evolution right? Please, enlighten me, what do we possibly have to gain from making it up? What's the purpose? What is it with you clowns and your conspiracies, propaganda, and hoaxes? Secondly, why the hell am I listening to you AT ALL? Are you a scientist? What research have you conducted?
"You are probably a moron" No, a moron is someone who is presented with the evidence and then completely dismisses it. Piss off maggot.
@trvlbuggy Reuters, i believe he said ... could be wrong but i'm listening again now.... yup it was Reuters perhaps you should clean out your ears and go over to reuters website to see thier sources.
@RomeoMD25 I would suggest you start taking anti-psychotics but I think perhaps society would be served better if one as twisted as you were to opt for the cyanide pills instead.
Goldman Sachs spent more money lobbying for the carbon tax than they spent lobbying against banking reform. They expect to make a? trillion dollars in 10 years off the energy derivatives market which will be the next bubble
to pop and destroy our economy beyond repair. It does not matter what the original idea behind the carbon tax was the reality is it will be a disaster.
This type of corruption is what has happened in the European Union. So many exemptions have been made to favored industries that it has
turned the entire carbon emission reduction effort into a fiasco. Not only has there been no reduction in the EUs carbon emissions in the four years the EU has imposed cap and trade, emission rates have actually accelerated at a faster rate
Personally, i am doing my part to reduce the CO2 plantfood in the atmosphere by drinking all the CO2 i can.
Pepsi, Beer, Champagne... bring it on. Let's save the earth by drinking more beer. Kegger, anyone? Makes just as much sense as the balderdash being passed off as 'science' by the warmers.
Unless the earth starts slowing down in it's revolution around the sun the Vernal equinox will still be March 20, 21, or 22 depending on those pesky leap years.
The "made up" parts are not the effects but the causes. The data simply does not lead to the conclusion that climate change is caused by CO2, let alone by man made CO2. According to the data, It's actually the other way around. Temperature increase leads to CO2 increase with about an ~80 year lag. Yes, the temperature of the Earth went up and naturally that impacts the Earth's eco systems, no one is denying any of the effects.
actually, it works both ways. CO2 increase leads to higher temperatures because of the greenhouse effect, but higher temperatures also lead to higher CO2 due to it being released from the oceans. What you're basically saying is that the greenhouse effect doesn't exist, good luck finding a single meteorologist or hell any physicist to agree with you
The empirical evidence for AGW is there, google "empirical evidence AGW"
@kekemankek No, that is not what I am "basically saying". I am saying that the CO2 vs. temp data shows that temp increase leads to CO2 increase and not the other way around. I am not saying the greenhouse effect doesn't exist, it does, and it plays a part in the numbers but it is a small part to the big picture. Most (~40%) of man-made CO2 emissions are absorbed by the Oceans (please do not now assume the rest all go to the atmosphere).
Yes, and I am saying the data shows it works both ways. Google "co2 lags temperature" and read the skepticalscience for example.
I don't know why you think the greenhouse effect is insignificant. Most estimates, from both models and empirical observations, put the climate sensitivity of CO2 to be around 3deg Celsius. Meaning a doubling of atmospheric CO2 leads to a 3deg temperature increase.
CO2 levels have already increased by ~40% since the industrial revolution.
The Associated Press claims that the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since Bill Clinton's second inaugural. But after it was discovered that NASA's James Hansen, Gore's chief scientific ally, had been fudging the numbers,
the agency was forced to correct its data. The 10 warmest years turn out to be, in descending order: 1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938 and 1939.
James Hansen was found fudging the numbers? Talk more bullshit please. The last decade was the warmest on record.
As goes for man-made CO2 compared with natural sources, your numbers are probably off but either way pointless. Natural CO2 emissions are ofcourse bigger, but they are balanced by natural CO2 sinks. CO2 emissions by humans is "extra" CO2 outside of this balance.
You'd have to be an idiot to believe that the post-industrial age CO2 spike is not due to humans.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the principal gas that trees and other plants need to survive, just like oxygen (O2) is the principal gas that humans and other animals require. Trees absorb CO2 and release O2-- animals inhale O2 and exhale CO2. See how nice this all works!
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is not to be confused with its poisonous evil cousin carbon monoxide (CO), which can kill humans and
Man-made carbon dioxide is only 0.117 percent of total carbon dioxide in the air and contributes only 0.0047 percent carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
The average person has been misled and is confused about what the current Global Warming debate is about, greenhouse gases. None of which has anything to do
with air pollution. People are confusing Smog, Carbon Monoxide (CO)
@masamuneMK5 I hope you are not taking the idea that CO2 increased with temp in the past as an indication that our artificial increase of CO2 levels will somehow have less effect. Just because nature increases CO2 levels when temp increases, it does not mean we should be complacent. We are unnaturally increasing CO2 which captures heat. This increase in heat will increase CO2 levels given off naturally. This idea actually should increase our action to mitigate global warming.
less than 2/1,000 of all CO2 is produced by human activity. So even if we wiped out every car, power plant, jet liner, and human being from the face of the earth, there would be no noticeable effect on global CO2 levels. The most important greenhouse gas by far is water vapor, which evaporates from oceans, lakes and rivers. Water vapor accounts for up to 90% of the earth's greenhouse effect.
Cenk, Science will also tell you: correlation is not causation. meaning: just because we're observing climate changes during our wonderful stay on Earth, doesn't mean we're necessarily responsible for it. don't mislead your simple-minded viewers here...
uh, no-one is claiming that just because we're observing climate changes it's probably us. Anthropogenic climate change is based on scientific evidence and research. For example, comparing recent satellite measurements with older ones show that less and less IR radiation is escaping to space, just like we'd expect with an enhanced greenhouse effect.
@kekemankek: that's preposterous! once again: observing and measuring change does not directly pin-point the root-cause. show me this evidence you speak of that shows a clear connection between our contributions and their direct effects.
climate change is nothing new; it precedes mankind by billions of years, on any planet, not just limited to earth.
If the reason for recent warming were an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations, trapping heat, we'd expect to observe a decrease in outgoing infrared radiation as there's more CO2 in the atmosphere to absorb it. In 1970 NASA launched the IRIS satellite measuring infrared spectra. Comparing new with old sets of data, we find a drop in outgoing radiation at greenhouse gas wavelengths, consistent with theoretical expectations. (Harries 2001)
There's more...we'd also expect an increase in downward IR radiation.
"Surface measurements from 1973 to 2008 find an increasing trend of IR radiation returning to earth (Wang 2009). A regional study over the central Alps found that downward IR radiation is increasing due to the enhanced greenhouse effect (Philipona 2004). "
Thus we have experimental data proving the connection between GH gas increases and global warming
Google "empirical evidence AGW" and read for yourself
not the horses :(
therellylongname 4 weeks ago
Climates change as they are cyclic. There's no proof that "global warming" has caused spring to come sooner. During the last 2 billion years the Earth's climate has alternated between a frigid "Ice House" and a steaming "Hot House". Where did man play a role in that? If you research it, you'll find that the same scientists say that its from changes in the earths orbit, changes in the sun's intensity and even volcanic eruptions, not from farting cows or SUV's.
elderban 4 months ago
Am i the only one who notices that the horses in the thumbnail were arabian, so that might have something to do with the fact TheYoungTurks are reporting on it...
DinoAvenger14 1 year ago
@DinoAvenger14 or you know, arabian horses are widely regarded as being superior to other horse breeds, and are by far the most popular kind, so when you type in horse you will probably come up with an arabian.
seriously anyone who thinks that TYT has some secret turkish agenda is dangerously paranoid.
millitantatheist1 8 months ago
TYTs are ignorant.
/watch?v=qAkfEX0sqAI
Dawgtha 1 year ago
My birth date is 10/16 and my initials are JP
For those of you trying ti figure out what the hell I am talking about...
J = 10th letter alphabet P = 16th..... I AM IMPORTANT!
upplsuckimcool16 1 year ago
Ahem Cenk I believe you mean bury their head into Dick Cheney's ass not the sand.
34601k 1 year ago 6
Horse and miscarriage. ba dum tsh.
GiantDoucheNG 1 year ago
Horse and Miscarriage. Ba dum tsh.
GiantDoucheNG 1 year ago
Cenk..Please note that people are not denying that there is global warming...What a lot of scientists are saying is that they don't think it's 'MAN MADE'...They believe that the world is just going through another one of it's many historic climate changes....and this period that we are living in now, is just another one of those natural periods of earth changes!
Nothing in nature remains the same forever, nature is constantly changing!
It will adjust again when it's ready to do so!
12235117657598502586 1 year ago
@12235117657598502586
Uh no, most scientists ARE saying it is man-made.
You are a piece of shit idiot.
Also we know the causes of the natural changes, none of them are happening now.
Hence it's man-made you fail.
mecher3k 1 year ago
@mecher3k - I refer you to my reply sent to @Cuddlebunzzzz !
12235117657598502586 1 year ago
@12235117657598502586 actually there are a lot of people denying global warming, not in the scientific community, but among the general populace. when people hear that scientists are debating about global warming, some people think that means that they're debating whether it's occurring or not, instead of debating what's causing it.
Cuddlebunzzzz 1 year ago
@Cuddlebunzzzz - You're quite right and thanks for your clarification.
I forgot to include the key word 'debate'. However, at this stage in the global warming debate, I tend to side with those scientists who believe that mankind's intensive demands on our planet is 'contributing' towards a SPEEDING-UP of natures 'change cycles'...But the cycles would still happen whether not mankind existed or not!
I think it will happen anyway no matter what - question is will it be sooner or later?
12235117657598502586 1 year ago
lookin at the title, global warming = horse abortoins.......? lol
Aspire198 1 year ago
Of course the equinox is unaffected...nothing short of a truly major impact, a major gravitational disturbance, or something not known to science could change it...
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
The title of this video is misleading, theres a VERY big difference between a miscarry and an abortion
Pimadude 1 year ago
I think Global warming is a scam. I mean, this could just be a cycle our earth is going through. The ice caps have been melting long before cars were even made. Our climate in the past year has gone up and down, up and down, not up constantly.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns oh my god are you that ignorant? lol Do you been up and down because of the SEASON? lol hahahaha thats pretty dumb dude, you gotta admit....
grendelee 1 year ago
I cant find the article on reuters. Anyone know what it's called?
jakobdrewaut 1 year ago
No humans are the most powerful creation, humans are so smart and amazing it's just everything they do turns out to be one big fuck up. THINGS ARE THE WAY THEY ARE FOR A REASON, not by chance.
SupremePenguinTone 1 year ago
Impacts of climate change in the news
Global floating ice in "constant retreat": study
Apr 28 2010
LONDON (Reuters) - The world's floating ice is in "constant retreat," showing an instability which will increase global sea levels, according to a report published in Geophysical Research Letters on Wednesday.
NORTH POLE ICE-FREE BY 2050?
The study did not shed new light on how soon the North Pole may be ice-free in summer, which many climate experts say could happen by 2050, perhaps even earlier.
Nightversionn 1 year ago
News..
---Melting ice makes the Arctic a vicious circle
James Screen and Ian Simmonds, of the University of Melbourne, said the rise in surface temperatures in the Arctic in the past 20 years had been more than double the global average
Dr Screen said white ice reflects a lot of sunlight, but as it melts due to man-made warming from greenhouse gas emissions, the dark water that is exposed absorbs more heat, which in turn, melts more ice, and so on
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD
AUSTRALIA
April 29, 2010
Nightversionn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Environmental news
Report: Despite Global Action, Biodiversity Is Declining
In a study published in Science, a team of scientists and environmentalists from around the world assessed the state of global biodiversity and found that it has been in steady decline. Human beings rely on a healthy, diverse planet too, and when the Earth suffers, so do we
on, Biodiversity Is Declining
By BRYAN WALSH Thursday, Apr. 29, 2010
Reported in Time Magazine
Nightversionn 1 year ago
This guy is bull shit
sportschick5670 1 year ago
Science news
FEDS TO STUDY ANIMAL CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS
RESTON, Va., March 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. government says it is funding 17 projects to better understand future climate change conditions and their effects on fish and other wildlife.
Officials said the projects include studies of alterations in Florida's ecosystems, potential impacts on Great Lakes fish, sea-level rise impacts on San Francisco Bay marshes, and the effects of melting glaciers on Alaska's freshwater coastal systems.
Nightversionn 1 year ago
Nightversionn 1 year ago
Clean, safe, free power
JonThm 1 year ago 10
NO CENK they didn't problem is that Global Warming is a screen for buy more expensive stuff now.
The real danger of GW started with the revolutionary changes of Attomic energy, more energy, more industries, we're pretty much fucked now so don't worry about it, just DON'T POLLUTE.
BurnRoddy 1 year ago
Yes, Cenk, the vernal and autumnal equinoxes are still at the same time of the year; it's not based on the weather, but on the position of the earth in its revolution around the sun. Your birthday is still on the vernal equinox...sadly, I don't think you were ever balanced ;) Delusions of grandeur? Not the ones that I have from being born on Jan 1.
Dhesyca 1 year ago
Environmental news
CLIMATE CHANGE: Snow Cover Turning to Lakes in the Himalayas
By Stephen Leahy
UXBRIDGE, Canada, May 7, 2009 (IPS) - As climate change takes hold, even the mighty Himalayas and Hindu Kush mountain ranges are now losing their snow and ice.
These are the world's greatest repositories of snow and ice outside of the polar regions, and yet they may melt away in just 20 to 30 years, leaving more than a billion people desperately short of water
Nightversionn 1 year ago
@Niightversionn
Spitfiremacx,
(I mean N ii ghtversionn Nig tversionn (no h)
Nigh tt versionn
Nightver ss ion,
Knigh tt vision
Nigh ttt version
Nightversiom,
Nightverslon, Nightversionnn, aryhuk, etc...)
You're 69 year old stalker. Youre a global warming DENIER with no peer-reviewed science so all you can do is play silly games. Further proof global warming deniers are frauds
Nightversionn 1 year ago
yay thanks Cenk, you reminded me that I wanted to watch The Butterfly Effect for a long time...
TheSleepaholic 1 year ago
Climate news
GREAT BARRIER REEF OIL SPILL HITS RENOWNED NATURE SANCTUARY
Oil from a huge Chinese ship which grounded in the Great Barrier Reef has hit a world-renowned nature sanctuary, officials said Wednesday, raising fears for seabirds and baby turtles now hatching there.
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
April 14, 2010
Nightversionn 1 year ago
cenk + science = just stop now
ILockItDown 1 year ago
THe world has been cooling since 1998
JonThm 1 year ago
Climate change in the news
SCIENTISTS INVESTIGATE ECUADORS RECEDING GLACIERS Andean glaciers are losing volume at an unprecedented rate, with some declining by 40% over the past 50 years. At more than 5,000m (16,400ft) high, tropical glaciers are particularly sensitive to a changing climate. BBC
25 April 2010
Nightversionn 1 year ago
Nightversionn 1 year ago
Besides, any sane American will gladly pay more for energy to get off of foreign oil.
Fighting clean energy initiatives is madness, even if you're under the ridiculous impression that almost every single climate scientist around the World is in on this absurdly impossible conspiracy.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
@sdrawkcabgnipytmi no NO FAIL I will not gladly pay extra to get off of "foreign" oil, I will pay extra for energy ONLY if we get off of "OIL" end of story.... not "oh well getting off of foreign oil we can get on our own oil and we'll be self sustained" no fail. screw that.. screw oil, screw the oil industry. just..no.... we got better things to develope here. lets move into a new age with resources just like we did with political correctness and everything else.
TropicalJosh 1 year ago
@TropicalJosh
Your post really makes no sense as a response to what I said.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
@sdrawkcabgnipytmi then you weren't paying attention. I DON"T WANT TO DRILL FOR OIL ON OUR SOIL! or in our waters. so there. I refuse to pay for oil end of story.
TropicalJosh 1 year ago
@TropicalJosh
I was talking about getting off of foreign oil and onto alternative energies, not about drilling on American soil and paying more for that. I agree with you.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
@sdrawkcabgnipytmi then what you need to say is "get off of oil" not "get off of foreign oil" people keep saying this thinking its a given. but others interpret it just as it sounds...get off of FOREIGN oil. when politicians say this they are talking about reducing foreign oil consumption and increasing our own oil consumption. but if you say "use alternative energies" or "we need to get off of oil" it comes across better. :) just a friendly tip
TropicalJosh 1 year ago
Carbon Derivatives will far exceed the value of gold.
You can live without gold.
But you cannot live without carbon dioxide.
The true term is Carbon Life derivatives.
When you cut people off from the essentials to live, they will die which will both decrease their carbon footprint and allow someone else to live.
All ready you are traded on Wall Street by GS.
They bet on your dying too
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
I almost asked why it's so hard for some people to comprehend the idea of global warming. Then I remembered that conservatives don't rely on facts.
immanuelx2 1 year ago
all the corporations who stand to profit from the CO2 fear mongering. Such as Goldman Sachs, who will be operate market
by which all the cap-and-trade trades are done. They stand to profit trillions of dollars over time from it and have a vested interest in getting legislation passed and promoting a fear? of something that is not based on solid science.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25
Telling me how much Goldman Sachs or Al Gore will make off of climate change is utterly irrelevant. When making such large scale changes to any part of our economy there will always be winners and losers.
The only thing that is relevant is whether or not climate change is real and man made or not. In the scientific community, there is simply no debate on those issues.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
God is smiting the Horses because.... ... they are evil?
:P
Joxman2k 1 year ago
Cenk and me have the same birthdays.
TymesRhymes 1 year ago
And when people are cult-like and fanatical about an issue, that usually tells me they're not thinking clearly or rationally. The supporters of AGW are as bad in this case, if not worse, than the deniers.
seanlaca 1 year ago
The Associated Press claims that the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since Bill Clinton's second inaugural. But after it was discovered that NASA's James Hansen, Gore's chief scientific ally, had been fudging the numbers,
the agency was forced to correct its data. The 10 warmest years turn out to be, in descending order: 1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938 and 1939.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
See what happens when you mess with nature...
IsisStarlights 1 year ago
a horse cock could cause an abortion. HAVE YOU SEEN THOSE THINGS? amagad, they're huuuge!
freyjasage 1 year ago
"One of you scientist folks" lol
im4everskilled 1 year ago
there's NO "debate" among the SCIENTISTS that global warming is caused mostly by humankind....FACT
the fossil fuel industry/rightwingers want us to believe that theres still a "debate" because of GREED
stopglobalwarming08 1 year ago
Profiteering at the expense of the working folk, making energy cost twice as much.
Climate change realists might not be popular, but then the truth never is.
Oil companies? called for carbon tax . It would drive up the prices of petrol. Go do some research
let us not forget that the CO2 count over the majority of the history of planet has existed? in quantities 20 times that of which they exist now
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
When did the health of the planet suddenly get a price tag. Personally, I don't care how much it costs or how much big companies profit or how much gas goes up, if it helps keep the planet healthy, it's fine with me. Because after all, when our oceans no longer have any fish in them, all of our fresh water is polluted to undrinkability, our crops won't grow and we all have cancer, money wont to matter that much... will it?
gragona 1 year ago
Public records reveal that as Al Gore lectures Americans on ... Living carbon-neutral apparently doesn't mean living oil-stock free
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25 SO what.I am very vocal in my opposition to microsoft I think they have an unfair advantage in the market and very monoploistic polocies.Yet I have an investment portfolio thru 401k's and other investment devices that includes stock in microsoft.Why because it make money and I need that to feed my children and secure my retirement.Your statemnt proves nothing other than gore has smart investments
chrisgalizia 1 year ago
Of course, big companies don't want to stop creating as much waste as the want and dumping it where ever they feel like at the time... it costs time and money to dispose of things properly. They don't give half a crap about what happens to the planet. They absolutely have to be regulated on how much waste and pollution they're causing.
gragona 1 year ago
Global-warming alarmists: GO READ the East Anglia? emails instead of spewing the drivel you've been told to repeat by your handlers.
The debate is FAR from over!
Carbon levels APPEAR to LAG temperatures - that means it is NOT a cause!! Gee let's IGNORE facts, shall we?
There is ZERO scientific reason to regulate carbon. It's a power-grab, period!!!
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25
"Carbon levels APPEAR to LAG temperatures - that means it is NOT a cause!!"
That is load of shit and is used as an anti-global warming propaganda tool.
I can't explain the reasons for this in a You Tube comments section, but if you give a shit about the truth, this video does a very good job at explaining it: watch?v=hWJeqgG3Tl8
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
Carbon trading is projected to be a multi-trillion business. when there is that much money in the pot, you can't trust anyone that has an interest in it. If the U.N. could ever be trusted this is an obvious wakeup call for those that cannot think for themselves.
The U.N. is no longer, if ever, a group to follow blindly.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
Goldman Sachs spent more money lobbying for the carbon tax than they spent lobbying against banking reform. They expect to make a? trillion dollars in 10 years off the energy derivatives market which will be the next bubble
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25 I am not a climatoligist or scientist in any way but im guessing u r not either.And yes the majority of scientists in this field DO AGREE that we are causing global warming maybe they are wrong and the minority is right.But to say its a powergrab for world leaders to agree with the overwhelming number of scientists and science is foolish.I can show you lots of reports on global warming being pure myth.Most of them were funded by exxon
chrisgalizia 1 year ago
My birthday is on the fall equinox; I hope that didn't get moved back as well :(
FourthDerivative 1 year ago
Goldman Sachs is in the middle of it, as usual a potential trillion dollar sure thing.
And Former Vice President Al Gore who will profit from the cap-and-trade plan through his company, Generation Investment Management,
Gore is joined by three former Goldman Sachs heads in their carbon offsets business.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
NAFTA: Ross Perot and Al Gore Debate 1993--time always proves AL Gore?
its not that hes wrong,,,,it that he lies thru his teeth.
watch?v=GhwhMXOxHTg
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
Global Warming is happening, whoever doesn't believe that is an idiot. Whether it be a natural phenomenon or human made or both, it doesn't matter. The fact is, it IS happening and we have to do all we can to prevent it from getting any worse. Otherwise we're all going to be screwed.
gragona 1 year ago
The National Aeronautic and Space Agency (NASA) has determined Mars, Pluto, Jupiter, and the largest moon of Neptune warmed at the same time the Earth recently warmed.
Two hundred million years ago, when dinosaurs walked the Earth, the average carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere was 1800 ppm, five times higher than today.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25 Funny that you leave out the planets that cooled over the same period. Most heating/cooling is due to processions of planets (as in every single case you mentioned) and the resulting change in albedo.
Who cares if C02 was 1800ppm 200 million years ago. None of our crops would grow in that climate, and we'd be extinct. Seems like that exactly what you're cheering for.
codediporpal 1 year ago
@codediporpal Agreed, were not dinosaurs, our health is incredibly fragile and were the only species that have agriculture. We also care about the deaths of other species. Nature doesn't care. Even if we didn't go extinct it would still cause the deaths of millions us and other species. Are we willing to let nature just take it's course and kill us off? I don't think so... I'm not just going to sit back and watch people destroy the planet when we could be doing something about it. Futile or not.
gragona 1 year ago
Always believed in Global Warming. Haha love the "Butterfly Effect" reference.
Chris12163 1 year ago
No serious person disputes the fact that global temperatures are rising. And I don't think anyone would dispute that these temperature changes have ecological impacts. The real debate is whether human behavior is influencing the rise in temperatures and by how much.
NathanielFaunce 1 year ago
@NathanielFaunce
No, there is no real debate within the scientific community about humans being a major cause. There's just a lot of propaganda out there to make us think there is.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
@sdrawkcabgnipytmi
I'm sure it is just that simple and you have a better grasp of the science that the IPCC and the climatology community. Please....
As far as propoganda is concerned, Koch and Exxon have spent over $50 million financing non-peer reviewed works by scientists outside their realm of expertise. Greenpeace did a great investigation on that topic. Not to say there hasn't been some misinformation on both sides, but let's not kid ourselves.
NathanielFaunce 1 year ago
@NathanielFaunce
Where exactly did I suggest that I "have a better grasp of the science that the IPCC and the climatology community?" Please... practice your reading comprehension.
I made the claim that the vast majority of legitimate climate scientists agree that anthropogenic climate change is real. The IPCC fully agrees with this. The propaganda is coming from non climate scientist sources, and has been overwhelmingly anti-anthropogenic climate change.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
more and more scientists are coming out and telling you that it is a scam. That there is no real science in it. It's Scaryence. "Scare Science." Doom and gloom. So they came up with a plan.
What if the people ask for proof? "Just tell them that all the Scientist agree that it is real, and they are smarter then
them, so they need just accept it. Any Scientists that say it's not real are just kooks, or bought off by big oil.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
Then we really don't disagree on anything. I assumed since you replied to my comment that your, "there's no real debate" was anti-warming. Though 97% of climatologists agree humans to be a major cause, there's still some debate about how much of an impact we have and how much is cyclical.
That's what I gather anyway, but I don't do weather. I can barely understand a 5 day forecast.
NathanielFaunce 1 year ago
@NathanielFaunce
Well as far as I've seen/read the recent increase is almost entirely anthropogenic. I certainly do agree that our ability to predict the scale of the consequences is somewhat limited.
I don't really understand why you brought up weather. That has nothing to do with climate change.
"it's hard to say whether these increases are definitely unprecedented due to the very brief climactic record" How brief do you believe this record to be?
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
@NathanielFaunce Let's see... C02 is a greenhouse gas, without which the Earth would be frozen solid. CO2 is up 20% in the last 50 years, and the increase almost exactly matches the amount of C02 from fossil fuel burning and deforestation. Yeah, human behavior probably has nothing to do with it.
codediporpal 1 year ago
@codediporpal
Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation. It's hard to say whether these increases are definitely unprecedented due to the very brief climactic record. I'm not really doubting we have an impact on the climate, I'm just trying to be a fair devil's advocate. Perhaps a greater controversy though is our ability to predict the consequences of warming. Although this could go both ways: either not as bad or worse than science predicts.
NathanielFaunce 1 year ago
@NathanielFaunce Except that is like debating whether evolution is real or the earth is more than 10,000 years old. Science has a general consensus on all of those with only a few radical scientists dissenting. Could they be right? Sure they could, but the smart bet is to take stock in what almost all of them agree on.
jstutz2003 1 year ago
Cenk, it isn't whether global warming is a fact or not, because it is. The argument is whether we're causing it, what degree we're causing it, and if we can do anything to change it. The answer is no, evident by how cult-like it's become, and how political and ridiculously fraudulent it's become, with con artists like Gore making literally billions off of it. At least market schemes like Cap and Trade sure as hell won't change it.
seanlaca 1 year ago
@seanlaca
We are causing it. According to just about every legitimate, relevant scientist.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
@seanlaca NOW WAIT JUST A MINUITE.U R right global warming is a fact but ther are many including senators congressman and supposed news anchors who deny that it even exists at all.They call it the Global Warming HOAX as if there were not undenyiable proof that the earth IS getting warmer.I agree with you that the debate should be about wheather mankind is causing global warming and other enviromental effects.But right now half the pop belives its a myth because of misinformation.
chrisgalizia 1 year ago
@seanlaca I don't see how it follows that if A is fervently believed in, then it is wrong -- Especially since A is fervently believed in because it's believers assume that it will affect them negatively. Most people fervently believe that if you cut their head off they will die, therefore they are adverse to getting their head cut off. Does their belief and fear of it make it non-existent?
OmadFeyd 1 year ago
@OmadFeyd
Because when you follow the money trail, particularly in politics, that will usually give you the answer whether something is a fraud. At worse, AGW is a scientific sham perpetrated to support a political agenda and market scheme. At best, it exaggerates scientific facts in order to support a political agenda and market scheme. Even if we take the best case, it's crystal clear that global warming is either not as critical as is claimed or there's nothing much we can do about it.
seanlaca 1 year ago
@seanlaca Well whether its man-made or not there still is a lot of retards that think its not happening at all
shipoopi92 1 year ago
@shipoopi92 There was a ice age before humans with our awful co2 so yes it does happen and no its not because of humans. People want to believe its our fault because they can do something about that but they are helpless when it comes to controlling the sun and our planet. Horse farts are bad for the planet so environuts should be happy every time life is killed.
Flagan65 1 year ago
@Flagan65 Thats your opinion. I believe that it is man-made but since scientists haven't proven if it is man-made or not both are logical explanations and i would support whatever scientists come up with.
shipoopi92 1 year ago
@shipoopi92 Then why was there climate change before humans made their appearance on earth? I read a NASA article about the upper atmosphere collapsing and the NASA scientists have no idea whats going on. They thought at first it was co2 but the numbers didn't add up.
Flagan65 1 year ago
@Flagan65 Well there is more than one way an ice age can happen. The obliquity and orbit shape of the planet, position of the continents, volcanoes, and even greenhouse gases (which will cause fresh water in the glaciers to enter the oceans and possibly stop the ocean currents which distribute heat around the world)could possibly cause one but like i said before scientists haven't yet proved it yet.
shipoopi92 1 year ago
@Flagan65 Wait, so if something can happen naturally then it can't also occur because of human activity?
Cause that would mean since there have been birds for millions of years, then airplanes can't exist?!
In any case, it's the CO2 in the lower atmosphere that causes the problem. We've known this for over a century now.
booley 1 year ago
You know, water vapor makes up most of the green house effect
ArandurKing909 1 year ago
March 21st. is the first day of spring. Cenk sticks in a way to get a lot more presents on his Happy Birthday. You deserve it man, cause you roll hard.
Oh, and Sorry about the spring thing. I love horses, and caterpillars.
kellythesinger 1 year ago
I didn't even know that some people don't believe in Global Warming. Well, I knew Bush didn't but he's a dumbass.
elmirasahar 1 year ago
I do think that global warming is a real problem, but I'm also pretty sure that the spring equinox (relative position of the sun to our equator) is constantly changing albeit extremely slowly, not because of increasing temperatures, but because the year is not exactly 365 days, which is why we have leap years, which however don't cover for all of the difference.
But it probably is getting a lot warmer, just not because of spring moving.
JIYkp 1 year ago
Also, Venus could have once been like the Earth (evidence through water errosion, ice, etc.), but as a result of green house gases and global warming, it is the 'hell' it is today. With this came predictions for Earth's fate.
NeccoWecco 1 year ago
The equinox is the sun's apparant path through the sky. At the equinoxes (there's 2), the sun reachest it's lowest point and its highest point in the sky. At the lowest point (winter) the days after become longer, and at the higest, the days after become shorter.
NeccoWecco 1 year ago
Of course a group of religious crazies, stealing and detonating nuclear materials will make global warming not matter
menthol5 1 year ago
Oh my god he's using the OVER 9000 "scientists" now. Isn't that cute? It's like they think this is important news that nobody has heard before and completely debunked it as the dishonest manipulation it is.
Asylumer 1 year ago
@Asylumer Keep using your Hummer then.
soundslave 1 year ago
does that move the date of equinox/solstice , thats a good question
supervegeta101 1 year ago
not to mention making this the worst allergy season on record!
RavenBlaze 1 year ago
Fact = Horses are having miscarriages.
How does that lead one to assume the global warming theory in its entirety?
playerwithfaith 1 year ago
@playerwithfaith You seemed to have missed the logical and factual connections he made to the established effects of global warming. Global warming => higher temperatures => "spring" moving => affects the migration of birds => affects the number of catipillars increase due to lack of pop. control => more injested by horses => miscarriages due to naturally occuring chemicals in normally controlled catipillar populations. Your welcome. Try to pay attention next time.
zemo231 1 year ago
Yes Cenk, the equinox is still on the 21st!
intoximacated 1 year ago
global warming: especially the upcoming Cap & Trade legislation. Goldman wants this bill Not for altruistic reasons, not to save the planet, but to systematically cheat the public out of trillions by managing this new mechanism for speculation.
Yes, its a bright future for finance.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25 I feel bad for you. At the very least, the human race should find alternative energy sources. Because I don't want to be around when oil runs out and humanity collapses. We need to use renewable energy now, otherwise people will die and wars will be fought over the remaining barrels. Global warming aside, humanity is fucked if we do nothing.
soundslave 1 year ago
The people who deny Climate Change could bury their heads in the ground - and maybe...just maybe they can grow a potato.
Dahgrostabphri 1 year ago
Obama wont bite the hand that feeds? him...and by "the hand" i mean the bankers
What do you think? Will Goldman Sachs and other banks involved in carbon offset trade (they already have an OTC future market set up for this) be able to impose this global tax, even if AGW has been proved to be a fraud?
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
This is a classic domino effect...It makes me sad
wateryskipper 1 year ago
The vernal equinox is a celestial phenomenon. It is determined by the sun in relation to the earth. We have equal parts of light and dark in March and in September (Autumnal Equinox). While this is part of what makes for Spring another part is the warming of the soil and this triggers all sort of plant and animal activity. Spring will not change as a calander event, but it always was a relative phenomena in seasonal change. Of course it will get earlier as the climate warms.
hornybo 1 year ago
I think Cenk missed the point completely. Skeptics aren't all arguing that the climate isn't warming up, it's the cause that's being debated. It could be higher sunspot rates, higher Co2 level, etc. Pick what you want, just think for yourself and go after the truth.
S1apSh0es 1 year ago
@S1apSh0es
Problem is virtually all the data shows it's caused by man. The panel set up by the UN with thousands of scientists have all shown data that carbon emissions by man have caused temperatures and climate change.
But it simply does not matter anymore, the changes that we need to be in place will not happen because of warming deniers. The frozen methane in the polar caps is already melting which will cause a runaway warming scenario that can not be reverted.
In short... we are fucked.
Xenite227 1 year ago
Ah yeah but change was never an option.. The deniers are just a symptom, if they hadn't been here we would've come up with another excuse. We've known about the necessity of conservation for decades, and we've never once responded appropriately. There are issues like the plummeting fish stocks or the decay of our forests that are much more immediate problems. And you don't even hear about them on the news.
People will always choose short term prosperity over long term necessity.
megamarsvin 1 year ago
@megamarsvin You got that right. And you know why of course right? Money! We will never solve these problems until we design a better way to deal with the wants and needs of the population. Money was an ok way to deal with scarcity 50 years ago, but it really is no longer valid. Its just in our heads now. So we need to ditch the monetary system and understand that what you do is for the benefit of everyone. Fantasy, I know, but a guy can dream :)
herpiethelovebug 1 year ago
@Xenite227
I remember reading an article written by a famous scientist who said that we are "past the tipping point". It amazes me that every scientist, except for the 5% who work for Exxon Mobil, agrees that global warming is major problem and is a result of our behavior, and yet it continues to be dismissed! One of the problems is that people believe that god will take care of it. Bachman said god saved the planet 2,000yrs ago! This TOTAL dismissal of facts is ridiculous.
rinka777778 1 year ago
@rinka777778 /clap
MrShadeBlade 1 year ago
Exxon and their ilk are not concerned about a carbon tax eating
into their profits because they know they wont have to pay it the tab
will be picked up by the ignorant taxpayer at the fuel pump at an inflated cost which
if anything will hand the transnational oil cartels an even bigger cut.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
How does global warming affect the earths axis and it's orbit
ARTAthletix 1 year ago
I knew a Climate Denier preacher would show up in response to Cenk's comments. Anyone who bothers to look at the extensive history behind the science and the massive scientific majority that favor human caused Global Warming would realize the nutjobs who deny it are motivated to deny reality by either political goals are outright insanity.
Though it doesn't help how certain well-funded think tanks keep spreading misinformation and deceive these desperate fools.
Asylumer 1 year ago
@Asylumer
That's the problem. These people will NOT read the books and scientific articles. They listen to Glen Beck and Sean Hannity, who are not educated, and who are both very religious. Remember, these are the same clowns who claimed that global warming was disproved because it snowed for a day in the south
When confronted with problems such as this, people rely upon the most simplistic of answers such as "God will take care of it" "I'll pray" and "I don't believe".
rinka777778 1 year ago
Global Warming fantasies that the earth is becoming one giant microwave heated up by man"s pernicious and insatiable industrial development is of course ridiculous. The only consensus
that exists on climate change is that if you believe anything the UN or Al Gore says, you are probably a moron
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25No,
No, retard, my knowledge on the subject comes from YEARS and YEARS and YEARS of research, speaking with the scientists and working with environmental conservation parties.
Ridiculous? No, you pretending like you have ANY fucking clue what you are talking about is ridiculous. I want the names of the articles and books, who wrote them and what their role in the scientific community is that disapprove global warming. Come on, dipshit, post them. I'm really curious to see.
rinka777778 1 year ago
Do the math. That is? nearly 40,000 worldwide scientists finally speaking out,
and more every single day. Al Gore has a whole whopping 26 to 52 UN "scientists" drafting the media reports for their climate change hoax. Those are the only reports you hear on the news, and many of the IPCC scientists don't agree at all with the UN reports. Some have even resigned over this.
petitionprojectorg
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25
God you are so fucking retarded. Did you extract these numbers directly from your ass?
rinka777778 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25
A hoax? Yeah, yeah, I know just like evolution right? Please, enlighten me, what do we possibly have to gain from making it up? What's the purpose? What is it with you clowns and your conspiracies, propaganda, and hoaxes? Secondly, why the hell am I listening to you AT ALL? Are you a scientist? What research have you conducted?
"You are probably a moron" No, a moron is someone who is presented with the evidence and then completely dismisses it. Piss off maggot.
rinka777778 1 year ago
Corporation don't want you to believe there is global warming. So it doesn't exist. No matter how many facts there are to support it.
SkreetGil 1 year ago
do you have a source for the horses aborting? haven't heard/read that anywhere.
thanks..
trvlbuggy 1 year ago
@trvlbuggy Reuters, i believe he said ... could be wrong but i'm listening again now.... yup it was Reuters perhaps you should clean out your ears and go over to reuters website to see thier sources.
madmoddersparkler 1 year ago
Profiteering at the expense of the working folk, making energy cost twice as much.
Climate change realists might not be popular, but then the truth never is.
Oil companies? called for carbon tax . It would drive up the prices of petrol. Go do some research
let us not forget that the CO2 count over the majority of the history of planet has existed? in quantities 20 times that of which they exist now
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25 I would suggest you start taking anti-psychotics but I think perhaps society would be served better if one as twisted as you were to opt for the cyanide pills instead.
madmoddersparkler 1 year ago
Goldman Sachs spent more money lobbying for the carbon tax than they spent lobbying against banking reform. They expect to make a? trillion dollars in 10 years off the energy derivatives market which will be the next bubble
to pop and destroy our economy beyond repair. It does not matter what the original idea behind the carbon tax was the reality is it will be a disaster.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
This type of corruption is what has happened in the European Union. So many exemptions have been made to favored industries that it has
turned the entire carbon emission reduction effort into a fiasco. Not only has there been no reduction in the EUs carbon emissions in the four years the EU has imposed cap and trade, emission rates have actually accelerated at a faster rate
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
The global warming scam passed by Congress. Goldman Sachs is in the middle of it, as usual a potential trillion dollar sure thing.
And Former Vice President Al Gore who will profit from the cap-and-trade plan through his company, Generation Investment Management,
Gore is joined by three former Goldman Sachs heads in their carbon offsets business.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
Personally, i am doing my part to reduce the CO2 plantfood in the atmosphere by drinking all the CO2 i can.
Pepsi, Beer, Champagne... bring it on. Let's save the earth by drinking more beer. Kegger, anyone? Makes just as much sense as the balderdash being passed off as 'science' by the warmers.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
The vernal equinox is when the sun is aligned with the equator, and the night is just as long as the day
KarateKidX 1 year ago
Unless the earth starts slowing down in it's revolution around the sun the Vernal equinox will still be March 20, 21, or 22 depending on those pesky leap years.
fightforyourrights9 1 year ago
global warming is fake man
donatshabani 1 year ago
Dont agree with ya on this Global Warming thing...there aint coincidences...I wonder if they'd pass the Copehagen treaty if the emails didnt come out
Charmer4856 1 year ago
Global warming caused my infertility
ston3thro 1 year ago
The "made up" parts are not the effects but the causes. The data simply does not lead to the conclusion that climate change is caused by CO2, let alone by man made CO2. According to the data, It's actually the other way around. Temperature increase leads to CO2 increase with about an ~80 year lag. Yes, the temperature of the Earth went up and naturally that impacts the Earth's eco systems, no one is denying any of the effects.
masamuneMK5 1 year ago
@masamuneMK5
actually, it works both ways. CO2 increase leads to higher temperatures because of the greenhouse effect, but higher temperatures also lead to higher CO2 due to it being released from the oceans. What you're basically saying is that the greenhouse effect doesn't exist, good luck finding a single meteorologist or hell any physicist to agree with you
The empirical evidence for AGW is there, google "empirical evidence AGW"
kekemankek 1 year ago
@kekemankek No, that is not what I am "basically saying". I am saying that the CO2 vs. temp data shows that temp increase leads to CO2 increase and not the other way around. I am not saying the greenhouse effect doesn't exist, it does, and it plays a part in the numbers but it is a small part to the big picture. Most (~40%) of man-made CO2 emissions are absorbed by the Oceans (please do not now assume the rest all go to the atmosphere).
masamuneMK5 1 year ago
Yes, and I am saying the data shows it works both ways. Google "co2 lags temperature" and read the skepticalscience for example.
I don't know why you think the greenhouse effect is insignificant. Most estimates, from both models and empirical observations, put the climate sensitivity of CO2 to be around 3deg Celsius. Meaning a doubling of atmospheric CO2 leads to a 3deg temperature increase.
CO2 levels have already increased by ~40% since the industrial revolution.
kekemankek 1 year ago
The Associated Press claims that the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since Bill Clinton's second inaugural. But after it was discovered that NASA's James Hansen, Gore's chief scientific ally, had been fudging the numbers,
the agency was forced to correct its data. The 10 warmest years turn out to be, in descending order: 1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938 and 1939.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@RomeoMD25
James Hansen was found fudging the numbers? Talk more bullshit please. The last decade was the warmest on record.
As goes for man-made CO2 compared with natural sources, your numbers are probably off but either way pointless. Natural CO2 emissions are ofcourse bigger, but they are balanced by natural CO2 sinks. CO2 emissions by humans is "extra" CO2 outside of this balance.
You'd have to be an idiot to believe that the post-industrial age CO2 spike is not due to humans.
kekemankek 1 year ago
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the principal gas that trees and other plants need to survive, just like oxygen (O2) is the principal gas that humans and other animals require. Trees absorb CO2 and release O2-- animals inhale O2 and exhale CO2. See how nice this all works!
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is not to be confused with its poisonous evil cousin carbon monoxide (CO), which can kill humans and
animals in just a few minutes.
Hansen worked for Enron!!
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
Man-made carbon dioxide is only 0.117 percent of total carbon dioxide in the air and contributes only 0.0047 percent carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
The average person has been misled and is confused about what the current Global Warming debate is about, greenhouse gases. None of which has anything to do
with air pollution. People are confusing Smog, Carbon Monoxide (CO)
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
@masamuneMK5 I hope you are not taking the idea that CO2 increased with temp in the past as an indication that our artificial increase of CO2 levels will somehow have less effect. Just because nature increases CO2 levels when temp increases, it does not mean we should be complacent. We are unnaturally increasing CO2 which captures heat. This increase in heat will increase CO2 levels given off naturally. This idea actually should increase our action to mitigate global warming.
zemo231 1 year ago
less than 2/1,000 of all CO2 is produced by human activity. So even if we wiped out every car, power plant, jet liner, and human being from the face of the earth, there would be no noticeable effect on global CO2 levels. The most important greenhouse gas by far is water vapor, which evaporates from oceans, lakes and rivers. Water vapor accounts for up to 90% of the earth's greenhouse effect.
RomeoMD25 1 year ago
Cenk, Science will also tell you: correlation is not causation. meaning: just because we're observing climate changes during our wonderful stay on Earth, doesn't mean we're necessarily responsible for it. don't mislead your simple-minded viewers here...
sdijnfpo0jaisf 1 year ago
@sdijnfpo0jaisf
uh, no-one is claiming that just because we're observing climate changes it's probably us. Anthropogenic climate change is based on scientific evidence and research. For example, comparing recent satellite measurements with older ones show that less and less IR radiation is escaping to space, just like we'd expect with an enhanced greenhouse effect.
kekemankek 1 year ago
@kekemankek: that's preposterous! once again: observing and measuring change does not directly pin-point the root-cause. show me this evidence you speak of that shows a clear connection between our contributions and their direct effects.
climate change is nothing new; it precedes mankind by billions of years, on any planet, not just limited to earth.
sdijnfpo0jaisf 1 year ago
@sdijnfpo0jaisf
The evidence is this:
If the reason for recent warming were an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations, trapping heat, we'd expect to observe a decrease in outgoing infrared radiation as there's more CO2 in the atmosphere to absorb it. In 1970 NASA launched the IRIS satellite measuring infrared spectra. Comparing new with old sets of data, we find a drop in outgoing radiation at greenhouse gas wavelengths, consistent with theoretical expectations. (Harries 2001)
kekemankek 1 year ago
@sdijnfpo0jaisf
There's more...we'd also expect an increase in downward IR radiation.
"Surface measurements from 1973 to 2008 find an increasing trend of IR radiation returning to earth (Wang 2009). A regional study over the central Alps found that downward IR radiation is increasing due to the enhanced greenhouse effect (Philipona 2004). "
Thus we have experimental data proving the connection between GH gas increases and global warming
Google "empirical evidence AGW" and read for yourself
kekemankek 1 year ago
ya cause scientists could never be cooersed or their reports changed to suit the politicians needs.
Aulpa 1 year ago
what do i need to write to have my comments posted youtube?
Issypt 1 year ago
we had 3 mini horses abort.....the neither the mares nor the foals survived.
xdyingflowerx 1 year ago
3/21 is the first FULL day of spring, and is the greatest day ever (my b-day as well lol).
WSpad3 1 year ago
anyone who denies global warming are clearly following the Glenn Becks, Sarah Palins, and G. W. Bushs...
Snakekilla12 1 year ago 3