Scientists using NASA data have released another bombshell. To make matters worse, this release was in the peer reviewed scientific journal Remote Sensing. The Alarmists have claimed that the "deniers" lacked credibility because relatively few peer reviewed journals were willing to oppose global warming.
"The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show. There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans." Translating from polite cautious academic speak to plain English, he is saying the NASA data shows the Global Warming computer models are bunk.
@hopeintruth1 Like to referece that? It's not from the flawed Spencer study is it? You know. The one where the editor of the journal Remote Sensing resigned, because he was so disgusted such a poor study could be published.
After a body blow like that, the Anthropogenic Global Warming alarmists need to start over from square one to build a case. Well, assuming they are honest and willing to be persuaded by facts. Ignoring this paper will essentially by a declaration, by the alarmists, that they have no interest in science or the scientific process.
@hopeintruth1 There your go. You have a more complete picture now. Google wiki Heartland institute and see the the sction on funding. You will notice Exxon in the list. Then Google Roy Spencer.Skeptial science and you will see Heartland hires him as a consultant. Let me join the dots for you. Exxon funds heartland to spread the nonsense denial campaign, then heartland buys friendly scientists to lie about the urgency of climate change. Simple isn't it?
It is true the world did warm between 1975 and 1998, but even Professor David Karoly, one of our leading alarmists, admitted this week “temperatures have dropped…both in surface temperatures and in atmospheric temperatures measured from satellites.” In fact, the fall in temperatures from just 2002 has already wiped out half the warming our planet experienced last century. (Check data from Britain’s Hadley Centre, NASA’s Aqua satellite and the US National Climatic Data Centre.)
Polar bears said to be threatened by warming when their numbers have in fact increased. Bottom line: fewer people now die from extreme weather events, whether cyclones, floods or blinding heatwaves.
In a study by Indur Goklany, who represented the US at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: “There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.”
@hopeintruth1 Polar bears require sea ice to hunt. Arctic sea ice based on current tends will be free of summer ice by mid century. Polar bear numbers have increased due to a hunting ban, however studies on the Hudson bay population show that for every week earlier the ice breaks up, bear live weight drops 10kg.
For five years, a network of 3175 automated bathythermographs has been deployed in the oceans by the Argo program, a collaboration between 50 agencies from 26 countries. Warming believer Josh Willis, of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, reluctantly concluded: “There has been a very slight cooling…”
The British Antarctic Survey, working with NASA, has confirmed ice around Antarctica has grown 100,000 sq km each decade for the past 30 years. Long-term monitoring by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports the same: southern hemisphere ice has been expanding for decades.
The Arctic ice cap has largely recovered. Satellite data from NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Centre this week shows the Arctic hasn’t had this much April ice for at least seven years.
@hopeintruth1 April ice??? What are you talking about. Data from 20 years ago? Arctic sea ice had it's 4th lowest January extent on record 2012 NSIDC.1.1 Million sq Km below 1979-2012 av
@hopeintruth1 You are talking chalk and cheese. Antarctic winter sea ice has grown, but every summer this almost completely melts. It dosn't effect the Earths energy budget. Arctic ice continues to trend down and the dark ocean left after melting absorbs more heat, that melts more ice. It's a feed back!
There's a place in Russia where the difference between summer and winter might be more than 100 C (minus 60 C in winter and plus 40 in summer). And this winter hasn't been as harsh, couple weeks around minus 15-20 C, couple days around -25. I'm more concerned about frozen canals in Venice. Thy hadn't such thing in years.
his predictions did happen so far thats why they interviewed him , I do believe this man cuz many scientist the mainstream ones one could say ; for money they are corrupted like he said .those ones who are considered to be the underdog almost always turn out to speak the truth in the end cuz many scientists Ignore new discoveries becuz that would mean all there lifeswork is based on misconceptions they rather not believe new things cuz they think they know it all some humans are so arrogant
@hopeintruth1 Err. No one has changed any name. The IPCC was set up in 1988. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It was called climate change then . It's called climate change now!
I completely agree with Piers Corbyn, its a corrupt science, scientists who claim they can prove global warming exists get funding for it because people worry about it, scientists who claim they can prove it doesnt exist dont get funding because no one is worried about it then. And it is the coldest down in Australia that I can remember, 5 years ago wed have entire weeks of over 40 degree (c) days, this summer weve only had about a weeks worth of over 30 degree days, its fucking freezing
Earth's atmosphere consists of:- Nitrogen - 78.084% Oxygen - 20.95% Argon - 0.934% Carbon Dioxide - 0.036% Neon - 0.0018% Helium - 0.0005% Methane - 0.00017% Hydrogen - 0.00005% Nitrous Oxide - 0.00003% Ozone - 0.000004% At 0.036% CO2 is a trace gas and unlikely to have any effect on climate! Instead CO2 is vital for the survival of plants which may not survive if CO2 is further reduced THE END OF PLANTS = THE END OF US. Further info, learn the carbon cycle - EDUCATE YOURSELVES!
@TheHumanity100 well temperature is rising due to CO2 and methane gases because they are green house gases. dont tell us to educate ourselves u just copy and pasted earths atmosphere. its not a hoax and look at the temperature increase in the past decade. its not an earth cycle because we are experiencing the 1930's greenhouse gases at the moment (with not too much factory industries at that time). it takes decades for these green house gases to come into play. so stop polluting!
Numerous posts on where is the credible proof to explain climate variation?
Well there is such proof but no one wants to listen. The results demonstrate an unassailable correlation with historic climate data and because the data can be calculated, the future climate patterns can also be calculated, a forecast for the next two decades is shown and we are in for a long cold spell in the Northern hemisphere.
If those scientists will examine those deep sea bed cores and ices cores they will notice that BEFORE ANY ICE AGE OCCURS AN INTENSE HEAT WAVE AND HOT CLIMATE WILL PRECEDE IT TEMPORARILY. Then and only then, the transition to an ice age will occur and that transition period ranges from 1 week to years or even decades and generations. That is why Russia is going to all nuclear power that will it alive right through the coming mini or major ice age! When will people listen to reason!?
@nigelelsass Politicians must rise against politics, be willing to sacrifice everything politically for the sake of doing what is right during it's 4 yr term. Russia has been listening to it's scientists & understanding the Pre-ice age temperature fluctuations which they have been expecting to come came (heat waves, droughts, high aridity, and wide far ranging fires) At least our oil & gas revenues were used in preparing for these weather catastrophes coming in the future, time is own our side
@nigelelsass We will see who is right but do not ever knock on Russian borders asking for help since we have finished the necessary infra-technostructures needed to protect our people and provide for their needs. You and your kind will alternatingly be freezing and roasting, and suffering from floods and droughts while we Russians are not dellusioned people, far from it we Russians are realists standing on reality and facing reality face to face, you and your kind are not, you poor people, pity!
@darthvader5300: Oh and the unprecedented combustion of peat layers was only an accident.... oh right you are the realists - whatever - yeah indeed, pity.
Anticipate "the earth is cooling" mantra this winter when record cold temperatures are recorded (record sales of Russian gas), and "it's just the Sun" crap when we roast next summer ("it's nothing to do with us")
@beachcomber2008 "it's just the Sun" crap ..... I know. All those silly graphs and people trying to make sense. Forget that. It makes my head hurt. Solar activity bs. It's more fun to dream the impossible and destroy the economy.
Has anyone noticed how the SCAM supporters want those who point out the bad science and failed alarmist predictions to give yet more examples of the folly! ROTFLMAO!!!
Anyone notice how the top comments don't coincide with the likes and dislikes of the clip? Otipua is definitely a dodgy. 490 Thumbs up for the clip, yet number one comment opposes the whole concept of this news story. I wonder how much youtube and the like got paid for manipulating the stats?
@ivhoven I guess most of the denial crowd are too intellectually challenged to find the thumbs down button on the comments. Whoops shouldn't have given that clue away ;-)
@ivhoven I guess most of the denial crowd are too intellectually challenged to find the thumbs down button on the comments. Whoops shouldn't have given that clue away ;-)
@ivhoven I guess most of the denial crowd are too intellectually challenged to find the thumbs down button on the comments. Whoops shouldn't have given that clue away ;-)
@ivhoven I guess most of the denial crowd are too intellectually challenged to find the thumbs down button on the comments. Whoops shouldn't have given that clue away ;-)
@ivhoven In an analisis of climate change articles in THE AUSTRALIAN by Robert Maine from 2004 to 2011, it was found there were 700 stories unfavourable and 180 favourable. I guess the advertising dollar speaks louder than the truth from 97% of the worlds climate scientists!
Programme kindly sponsered by fossil fuel bohemoth GAZPROM, The second most profitable company on the planet 2010. (31.9billion can sure buy a lot of disinformation)
@ivhoven Okay, Gazprom the second most profitable company on the planet at 31.9Billion then number 3 Exxon 30.5b, Number 5 Shell 20.1b, 8 Petrobas 19.1, number 9 Chevron 19b and just missing the top 10 petronas at 17billion. How does your trillion $ fantasy industry of the future compare?
@ivhoven Okay, Gazprom the second most profitable company on the planet at 31.9Billion then number 3 Exxon 30.5b, Number 5 Shell 20.1b, 8 Petrobas 19.1, number 9 Chevron 19b and just missing the top 10 petronas at 17billion. How does your trillion $ fantasy industry of the future compare?
@ivhoven Actually they true giants of the oil industry are the state owned companies such as Saudi Aramco,but they don't publish finances. Then there's the private oil giants like Koch industries. Then big coal and the auto makers have a big interest in BAU also.
There is no way the third world can develop without cheap electricity and you cannot run a factory on a trickle of unreliable energy from solar panels or windmills that stop when its dark and not windy! They have natural resources and this is a plot to prevent them using them to develop and compete with the rest of the world.
@otipua08 What natural resources?! You are actually now most definitely the ultimate simpleton I have ever had the unfortunate opportunity to have to bear witness. It is the most resource rich continent in the world. That's a fact. Not a debatable one like your Climate "theories". If you want to go live in a hut without electricity go for it. The rest of us will continue our way of life.
@ivhoven Just asked what natural resources you are referring to. You really think insults strengthen your argument. No, actually only verifiable facts can do that
Last year Britain and Europe saw the coldest snowiest winter since the one I remember in 1980 it was probably colder last winter than 1980 so we can all play the game where its hotter now than before as it was colder last year than before. The fact is climate is simply eratic. The real issue here is not about us and what we can do to save ourselves but the third world and how can they develop.
@otipua08 These figures are manipulated to show the desired result. 20 years ago 6000 points of temp measurement were taken against only 1500 today using an average temp. With the example of California where there are deserts, beaches and mountains they no longer use a temp measure from the mountains yet they still compare the temps when they used to measure the mountains!!!
There is no proof that Co2 has an effect on global temperature. There is proof that computer models produced by the UN and IPCC have been manipulated to show their desired result of warming. There is proof of global cooling but that has been hidden from public view.
The world's temperature changes naturally all the time in a chaotic manner which is what makes prediction so tricky.
AGW is simply huge business making certain people rich from taxing the public.
@yogbert All the scientific organisations studying the subject say there is proof. 2010 was the hottest year on record, The 2000's the hottest decade.
@yogbert Actually the combined effect of the green house gases has been known about for over a century. I am afraid your statement about CO2 having no effect on global temperature is just nonsense. Without these gases the temperature of the Earth would on average be 33degC lower!
@otipua08 do you now how much co2 from volcano activities and methane gases is produces every year non human? co2 from human is nothing the man is telling something simple, is a solar and lunar activities the problem, that is the real deal.... bad solar activity= more co2 to heat the planet, ice is melt= pressure in water= volcanoes to blow to cold down the planet. is a natural protection, we are too small to feel the time of this process, human create problems= reaction them solution!
@RaulHHO Emissions of CO2 by volcanoes amount to about 300million tonnes per year (US Geological Survey). Emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels amounts to 30 Billion Tonnes per year (EIA figures) or 100 times more than volcanoes.
@RaulHHO Methane in the atmosphere has increased from 700 parts per billion before the industial revolution to 1800 ppb now. Sources include emissions from rumanant livestock and rices paddies. Inceasing population and dietary changes have resulted in increased emissions. As the Earth warms and permafrost melts, methane is being released in greater quantities from high latitude tundra also.
@RaulHHO Climate scientists know the sun is not the cause of the current warming. The solar cycle has just come out of an extended minimum and still 2010 was the hottest year on record, tied with 2005. 2011 was the 10th warmest on record which was an achievement because La Nina years are usually much cooler. It was the hottest La Nina year on record.
@otipua08 According to the Max plank institute for solar systems they have proof that the sun has increased its brightness and heat output. You are spreading global warming propaganda (lies). you alarmist nazi brain washed gullible fuckwit.
@vmgqie Have you even bothered to check the bull shit you are spewing. Google Max Planck Institute solar irradiance and try to read the simple graph that shows declining irradiance and increasing temperature you simpleton.
@otipua08 That was sun spots graph you dumb cunt. they have another study which says, the sun's has increased its heat and its brilliance. Done by a scientist named Dr Sami Solonky or something like that, so there alarmist nazi
@vmgqie I see I have to make it simpler for you. Horizontal axis time. Verticle axis both solar irradiance per metre sq and average global temperature anomaly from mean. Duh!
@hopeintruth1 That's right. The combined effect of the greenhouse gases including the now0.0392% of CO2, is around 33deg C. Google "wiki greenhouse gases" for more information. Without these gases planet earth would have a climate similar to the moon with extremes of up to 123deg during the day and -233deg at night. The bulk of the atmosphere,Nitrogen and Oxygen, do not have these greenhouse properties.
Agree or disagree with my positions you can see who I am and what I believe on my youtube page . I just had a look at your youtube home page and its blank .
Maybe you are a minion of the oil companies that are owned by the big multinational banks that stand to make trillions out of the global warming nonsense ?
Or maybe you are just a useful idiot who is scientifically illiterate ?
@hopeintruth1 You can't hold a discussion without resorting to conspiracy theories?That only happens when there are no facts to support your position. I don't use my Youtube account much, but if you click onto my otipua08 icon in the top right hand corner you will see my history, if that interests you.I can assure you I don't work for any fossil fuel related industry. They are actually the ones funding the denialist campaign.
All the big oil companies support the global warming theory and stand to make a fortune from it . All BIG OIL COMPANIES ! Cui bono , who benefits ?
As for empirical evidence , atmospheric physicist , MIT Professor of Meteorology for 27 years and former IPCC lead author Richard S. Lindzen is one of THOUSANDS !!! Thats right THOUSANDS !!! of climate scientists who does not believe the climate alarmist nonsense .
@hopeintruth1 So. How exactly do fossil fuel companies benefit from attempts to reduce the use of their product thru regulation? In my experiace they are the ones actually funding your denialist campaign.
@hopeintruth1 Why was exxon funding an organisation deliberatly trying to spread denialist psuedo-science then?Google heartland institute wiki. Look up funding.
@hopeintruth1 Thousands of climate scientists??? You are't refering to the OISM petition are you? Last time I looked they had 39 scientists working in climate science. The rest were vets, docters, teachers or whatever. A chimpanzee could have signed it and never checked. The document circulated with the petition amounted to scientific fraud, according to the national acadamy of sciences. It's been circulating for 15 years and they only managed 39.LOL
The largest % of greenhouse gas in our atmosphere by a huge amount is water vapour .
CO2 is irrelevant and has little effect on the climate .
The worlds monetary system is based on the petrodollar and like all fiat money it is about to crash . The international banks need a replacement and carbon credits are it .
@hopeintruth1 You are correct. Water vapour is the most abundant greenhouse gas, however, H2O cannot drive temperature. For H2O vapour to incease in the atmosphere, temperature must increase first, otherwise the air becomes saturated and it rains. H2O is a feedback gas, it compounds the effect of CO2. CO2 traps the infra-red radiation heating the atmosphere and forces temperatures higher.
@hopeintruth1 In my opinion carbon trading is a waste of time and as you say, only serve to make money for those trading them. I doubt that they will genuinely reduce emissions. To combust fossil fuels and release CO2 that has been sequestered from a historical geological era, cannot be remedied by planting trees and claiming credits.
@ivhoven It is a greenhouse gas. Burning fossil fuels is increasing it's concentration in the atmosphere. Temperature records show temperatures rising. The suns output,cosmic rays and the earths orbit are not causing the temperature increase. Computer models confirm the warming so far experienced was caused by human emmissions and extrapolated forward indicate a destablised climate.
@otipua08 A greenhouse gas? What happens to plants in a greenhouse? They flourish. Since you seem to be an expert on the matter, pray tell, what is the temperature of the earth? And what was is it 50 years ago? The reality is noone can judge the temperature of the earth, CLIMATE CHANGE is real, MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE is the grass roots of the creation of a global currency. ENVIRONMENTALISM is a new religion. Go and hug the trees, and kiss my ASS.
@ivhoven I give up! What is the temperature of the earth? I guess you are the expert. You seem to know there's been no warming since 1950. Tell me your information source. Hope your arse is clean I'm all puckered up.
@otipua08 Thats exactly my point you, nor any other scientists can answer the question, but will say with unrelenting confidence that the EARTH is warming, yet no one can quantify the earths temperature. Climate gate proved it all a sham, the manipulation of figures to suit the elite. My ass is clean, but you'll be puckering up to the elitists cartels who will be sticking it right up their sonny. Stick it to the man, or the man will stick it in you. You are a victim of propaganda. Read a book.
@ivhoven wow I almost choked on that one.LOL.. You took that lying fox media beat up seriously. Amazing. Gullible. Whatever. I guess those greenhouse plants are sucking up all that CO2 from fossil fuel emmissions. Oh, hang on, the concentration in the atmosphere has increased from 280ppm to 392ppm.
@otipua08 LIE!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA. You are a deluded propaganda infested simpleton. Fox news!? We dont even have fox news in Australia. What we do have though is a better education, better University System, and a populous who thinks for themselves. Unlike you who has clearly been brainwashed. Btw, what does your name mean?
@ivhoven You're an Aussie. Gidday ocker! I should have mentioned Rupert Murdocks Aussie assets instead then "The Australian" "Daily telegraph"," Foxtel" etc. "The News of the world" scandal should be a warning to you about the motivation and reliability of this tabliod denial propaganda. Sorry about the multiple posts.
@ivhoven Oh yea. The global temperature for august was 16.15deg C compared to the 20th century average of 15.60.NOAA website. I'll see if I can track down the 1950 Temp.
@otipua08 You are gonna sit there and tell me that Man can quantify THE ENTIRE GLOBES TEMPERATURE?! You are actually deluded. The globe has so many different weather patterns all over the world to suggest one can even average these out (if all are even attainable) and substantiate a global temperature is Arrogant and naive. You clearly are a very uneducated individual. Its ok, continue to let someone else do the thinking for you.
How about Hillary's lies about "taking gunfire flack" getting off a plane when she went to Yugoslavia back in the 90s which was found to be total b.s.. But heck, she's actually Secretary of State and you'd vote for her too even tho' she's a proven liar, right?
I am not confused as I have a pretty good idea as to what the globalists and environmentalists have in mind for U.S citizens. And yes I am angry and I have a right to speak out against the forces that wish destroy U.S. prosperity. Maybe u don't always have the right to speak out where ever ur from, but we Americans still have that right ---tho we currently have a President who wishes to Gaia for all speech to reflect only the views of his administration.
@wildnites558 : The "forces that wish to destroy U.S. prosperity" - I am glad you included the "wish" as US prosperity has mostly been reduced by decisions taken by American people.
In my experience, you are a country of angry and undereducated conspiracy theorists who can only live under a threat - whether real or inaginary - because that is how you live the past 60 years and have no other way to exist.
I have a higher prosperity and degree of freedom where I am from (just FYI).
Oh and by the way, ignore the junk by 'verchorik' below also, for example:
A spokesperson BOEMRE, Michael Bromwich, where Monnett works, has has stated that "the agency placed Mr. Monnett on administrative leave for reasons having nothing to do with scientific integrity, his 2006 journal article, or issues related to permitting, as has been alleged. Any suggestions or speculation to the contrary are wrong." The suspension only has to do with the proceedures of awarding of a contract for a study
Corbyn is a quack, he's the one making money off of his phony science; real scientists work on science for respect of the field and to gain knowledge, not for profit like Corbyn. He's a disgusting human being, nobody should give him airtime.
Exxon, BP, et al don't bother me as much as the global warmists who want a global carbon tax. if I don't want or need gas, I don't visit an Exxon or BP station. If we belive the lies of Al Gore and the pseudo-scientists at EAU, we eventually all get screwed with $8/gal. for gasoline and a hidden carbon tax -- and this based on sketchy, junk science. Remember 'hide the decline' and 'we can't account for the lack of warming' proof that the warmists are dishonest and have a very specific agenda.
It's about time those brave, humble public servants like Exxon, BP, Shell, Chevron, Total, and ConoccoPhillips struggling to get by on their meager $140 billion / year combined revenue stood up to those 300,00 fat-cat scientists who're living large on the National Science Foundation's extravagant $6 billion / year research "gravy train." As one such fat-cat who's been living the high life on $17k / year, few things would please me more than to see Corbyn run over by an SUV--except maybe a hybrid
I wonder what all of you pseudo skeptics will be saying when it will get so bad, even you will have to realize that you were on the wrong side of history. Like all the other anti scientific ideologists, those who defended smoking, opposed vaccination, proposed slavery and so on. The blood of the millions of people who will suffer will be on your hands, too.
Sounds to me like you're hoping for a disaster. Many people defend smoking not from any scientific point of view but simply because they enjoy the pleasure of smoking. Don't know why, personally I hate the smell of it. Most of the people who "defend tobacco" today just wish to smoke regardless of what the science says. Unless you're talking about the bogus studies of the 1950s when big tobacco was paying doctors and scientists to cover up critical data like the global warmists are doing today.
@wildnites558 : You mean like skeptics are pushing over and over again the list of 31,000 scientists created by F.Seitz .... who precisely conducted over 40 research on the link between cancer and tobacco without ever showing a link (thanks to grants from Tobacco companies)... well here you go - the same people (F.Seitz and F.Singer) have been in the same "denialist boat" whether on GW or tobacco - also part of the donors were the same.
Using the tobacco argument is apple 'n oranges. I hate tobacco and I always believed that the industry worked dilligently to hold back critical information about tobacco -- which would have saved millions of lives. The slam-dunk facts about the dangers of tobacco use were well known decades before warning labels showed up showed up on cigarette packs. G.W., on the other hand is false and phony science and most of it is insidiously designed by the U.N. to micro-manage national economies.
@wildnites558 : Well you can believe that the guy who outright lied to you about tobacco this time received money from the same lobbying group to "expose the truth on global warming" without have any hidden interest. It is however extremely naive.
GW is demonstrated in the specific change of radiative forcing at specific absorption bands of man-made greenhouse gases and nothing and nobody was able ton invalidate this formal proof - then again you are free not to trust this hard fact.
I'll believe whatever I want to believe based on my own investigations. I don't take one single person's word for it - i try to look at the facts. People can get it wrong, people can misinform and people can outright lie. U love Bubba Clinton don't U? How many outright lies did he tell ---and yet you and most leftist/liberals would vote for him in a heartbeat if he ran for POTUS again, wouldn't you? EAU got caught in a major lie, but you still believe them, right?
Furthermore, I don't wish to deny you any belief you have.Im not a denialist. I'm for debate -- unlike the left. Al Gore ducked any debate. The American media pretty much eschews any national debate on G.W. It's the liberals, and globalists who don't want to debate because they know full-well when the facts come out about the profound inaccuracies on so-called G.W. people, en masse, might have second thoughts - and the globalists don't want second thoughts because it only delays their time-line.
@wildnites558 : Again you can believe that 97% of all the 1,300+ scientists with 20 or more publications in atmospheric science are wrong and the isolated position of the majority (not all) US right wing is right - even though formal proof shows a strong increase in radiative forcing to be the result of human acitivites.
In this debate, AlGore is just a parasite which has lead to the polarization.
@nigelelsass I'll have to look that one up myself. But again, consensus or majority is not science.
"even though formal proof shows a strong increase in radiative forcing to be the result of human acitivites."
What the heck does this mean??! Sounds like some re-worded gobbledy-gook by lefties who have been frustrated in their desire to set up a world body to institue a global carbon tax and micro-manage national economies. Too bad about the EAU debacle, it shined the light of truth on GW.
@wildnites558 : This is precisely why the debate should be left to scientists - and I leave medicine to MDs (people who have studied it) and I am humble enough not to pretend having any meaningful opinion in the field. Submitting a medical decision to the democratic process (= non experts) can be dangerous.
If you would have had spectral absorption physics in high school or university, you would know what it means.
"This is precisely why the debate should be left to scientists"
Pure B.S. Here we go again. There's BEEN NO DEBATE, SKPPY!! The scientists on the side of AGW don't want debate or at least the ones controlling the whole hoax don't want debate. They deispise the fact the we free Americans have a say in our politics, that we can vote someone out of office whose policies we disagree with. And quite frankly, if science has the potential to attenuate my livelyhood as an American, I will be heard!!
@wildnites558 : There is a debate - my guess is however that you imagine that a scientific debate is something in the columns of the WSJ which would show how little you understand about science.
Do you have an access to Elsevier, Springerlink or Sciencedirect? NO? Then do not whine about "no debate". Because you have ignored something does not mean it does not exist. The world doesn't revolve around you.
@wildnites558 : I am just wondering - do you also go after specialists of all fields because you do not understand their own lingo and own field - therefore there must be a conspiracy???
Once again you link science and politics. At least the IPCC has the decency to keep them in totally separated chapters....
PS: because you do not understand something does not mean it is false or direct against you.
@wildnites558 : I do not see the interest of "American debates" as they consist in recycling information and extrapolated opinions from mass media, with a very low level of accuracy (add to this a bit of conspiracy theories , fears and lack or rationality). I frankly do not see the interest in it. The debates consist mostly in putting into the hands of non-experts a complexity they cannot master. It would be like asking from me a medical opinion I cannot provide (and do not claim to be able to)
I do not see the interest of "American debates" as they consist in recycling information and extrapolated opinions from mass media, with a very low level of accuracy"
Says you. Real scientific debates never happened--at least not publicly. The left and the globalists like it that way so they can institute political policies most people would never believe in or vote for. Of course you don't see interest in a debate where the fate of a nation's economy is at stake - you have a "warmist" agenda.
@wildnites558 : REAL SCIENTIFIC DEBATES DO NOT HAPPEN IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE !!! People would turn off their TV after the first set of data and equations !!! This is why science is discussed in the peer review process which consists in mutual criticism. You can see it all if you have an access to Elsevier, Springlink, Sciencedirect, etc.
You commit a first mistake if you mix science/ policy - and do not want to dissociate the science from the policy discussion; how are you different form AlGore?
@nigelelsass Uh Skippy, In the US they do in fact happen in the public. Especially, when the consequences of these leftist policies by those who are the enemies of freedom can have a major impact on American lives and our ways of living, then you BETTER BELIEVE WE"LL BE PART OF THE DEBATE! And woe be it to any politician who subjects the American taxpaying voter to some band of U.N globalist neo-Marxists who see the U.S. taxpayers as a cash cow to fund their inept global misadventures.
@wildnites558: I live in a country with much stricter environmental regulations - we are more free and prosperous - we have a center-right green party.
You are an all angry and messed-up country.
FYI: What the US has spent on its wasteful wars is more than 5x what was asked to solve the climate crisis - I do not even speak on what you have spent on the housing bubble. You are not a "cash cow" - dream on - you are at best a "cash waste" and parasite to the financial system,
@wildnites558 : The US which has ruined the world prosperity accusing others of U.N. globalist neo-Marxist who see the US as cash cow.... WITH WHICH CASH ???? You are bankrupt my dear, unlike my country which posted a budget surplus.
You are totally messed-up and one can only laugh at your claims. The thing the US is the best at is destroying itself and exporting its problems and crisis. Frankly if I were a citizen of your lousy country I would remain silent (and get my acts in order).
@m1aws : GENIUS - publish something - then we´ll speak.
Oh right and the system is totally stupid, we should have people like you without any degree in science review scientific papers... also Ayatollahs and Mujaheedeen in the review panel, right? idiot.
@nigelelsass Would you like me to have it peer to peer reviewed too? I'll get a few buddies together to give it weight. hahaha. As if the systems not stupid. Out of the 5.5 million papers in the past few years. What has been accomplished apart from too little. Einstein put one paper forward about gravity waves and it was rejected by his mathematician buddy.
Stop being a loser religious arsewipe too.
No GW in the past decade and the trend is down! Get over it.
Why do people attack those that say Man made Climate Change is Bullshit, but with the Al-Gore streotypes they just sit hanging on every word. The great thing about the CO2 Scam is, it will never ever end. Even if man reduces emissions by 100%, there will still be CO2 created and the Climate will Continue to Change. And the CO2 hoax will Continue for even more money.
This is the guy who claimed that there would be major earthquakes and severe weather June 27-July 2 and nothing notable happened. Just like most crackpots, he makes bold predictions and then when on occasion he is right he trumpets them to support his pseudo scientific view. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. This man is either a schill for the petroleum industry, or a madman.
@ronpaulbot The oil companies all support the carbon tax scheme. They are all in with this scam. So calling someone a shill for the petroleum industry will not work anymore.
Can't believe they're wanting to teach more about climate change to children in schools. As Prue MacSween so perfectly put it, it's taking us back to the hitler era where young minds are being fed propaganda to serve the beneficiaries of carbon tax.
One day, not so far in our future, all the green plants of the world united in agreement when a couple of plants convinced all the rest of them that oxygen was a deadly gas and it needed to be reduced to save the planet they lived in and all life on it.
Hmmm, does that make sense? About as much sense as Al Gore's agenda of 'climate change' and reducing carbon dioxide.
Willie Soon, one of the scientific figures who claimed to be skeptical about climate change, has admitted to being paid more than $1 million in the past decade by major U.S. oil and coal companies. June 29, 2011
The very same climate hoaxters met in Stockholm this week, to ram through a new policy for global population reduction, which will be presented to the UN and put on the agenda at the Rio Summit next year.
What they didn't expect, was that they would be exposed by a small group of protesters outside. Watch this video:
watch?v=srYHFbom4Rc
This is a new coup attempt that needs to be exposed worldwide!
And the part that scares me, is this idiot actually Believes what he's talking about o.O being blind to the effects of Co2 just because he doesn't want to believe it, or admit that he's full of shit.
People dont be ignorant and educate yourself before believing in the climate change propaganda. It is true that the climate change is not caused by humans and the hienas of the new world order spread the propaganda. The same was with swine flue, sars and bird flue. Propaganda, propaganda, propaganda! Just the way of making BIG money.
@thatsanna .... that will be HARD if people educated themselved in SPECTRAL ABSORBTION PHYSICS and actually see on an experimental basis the effect of greenhouse gases.
My physics teacher didn't lie to me and I clearly recall identifying the spectral absorbtion range of specific greenhouse gases.
@otipua08 Your wrong... Al gore is a scam... he wants you to pay for breathing... Fossile fules does not go down because of carbon tax... its going UP.. And that means with carbon tax that YOU are paying more to the master conman Al Gore (Globalist NWO SCUM)..
This has been flagged as spam show
The British Antarctic Survey, working with NASA, has confirmed ice around Antarctica has grown 100,000 sq km each decade for the past 30 years.
The Arctic ice cap has largely recovered. Satellite data from NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Centre .
For five years 3175 automated bathythermographs has been deployed in the oceans by the Argo program, and has detected a slight cooling .
Professor David Karoly alarmists “temperatures have dropped…both in surface temperatures and in atmospheric .
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
part 1
NASA Data Demolishes Global Warming Hoax !
Scientists using NASA data have released another bombshell. To make matters worse, this release was in the peer reviewed scientific journal Remote Sensing. The Alarmists have claimed that the "deniers" lacked credibility because relatively few peer reviewed journals were willing to oppose global warming.
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
part 2
"The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show. There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans." Translating from polite cautious academic speak to plain English, he is saying the NASA data shows the Global Warming computer models are bunk.
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 Like to referece that? It's not from the flawed Spencer study is it? You know. The one where the editor of the journal Remote Sensing resigned, because he was so disgusted such a poor study could be published.
otipua08 1 week ago
part 3
After a body blow like that, the Anthropogenic Global Warming alarmists need to start over from square one to build a case. Well, assuming they are honest and willing to be persuaded by facts. Ignoring this paper will essentially by a declaration, by the alarmists, that they have no interest in science or the scientific process.
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 There your go. You have a more complete picture now. Google wiki Heartland institute and see the the sction on funding. You will notice Exxon in the list. Then Google Roy Spencer.Skeptial science and you will see Heartland hires him as a consultant. Let me join the dots for you. Exxon funds heartland to spread the nonsense denial campaign, then heartland buys friendly scientists to lie about the urgency of climate change. Simple isn't it?
otipua08 1 week ago
It is true the world did warm between 1975 and 1998, but even Professor David Karoly, one of our leading alarmists, admitted this week “temperatures have dropped…both in surface temperatures and in atmospheric temperatures measured from satellites.” In fact, the fall in temperatures from just 2002 has already wiped out half the warming our planet experienced last century. (Check data from Britain’s Hadley Centre, NASA’s Aqua satellite and the US National Climatic Data Centre.)
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
Polar bears said to be threatened by warming when their numbers have in fact increased. Bottom line: fewer people now die from extreme weather events, whether cyclones, floods or blinding heatwaves.
In a study by Indur Goklany, who represented the US at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: “There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.”
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 Polar bears require sea ice to hunt. Arctic sea ice based on current tends will be free of summer ice by mid century. Polar bear numbers have increased due to a hunting ban, however studies on the Hudson bay population show that for every week earlier the ice breaks up, bear live weight drops 10kg.
otipua08 1 week ago
The seas are getting colder !
For five years, a network of 3175 automated bathythermographs has been deployed in the oceans by the Argo program, a collaboration between 50 agencies from 26 countries. Warming believer Josh Willis, of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, reluctantly concluded: “There has been a very slight cooling…”
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
The British Antarctic Survey, working with NASA, has confirmed ice around Antarctica has grown 100,000 sq km each decade for the past 30 years. Long-term monitoring by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports the same: southern hemisphere ice has been expanding for decades.
The Arctic ice cap has largely recovered. Satellite data from NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Centre this week shows the Arctic hasn’t had this much April ice for at least seven years.
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 April ice??? What are you talking about. Data from 20 years ago? Arctic sea ice had it's 4th lowest January extent on record 2012 NSIDC.1.1 Million sq Km below 1979-2012 av
otipua08 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 You are talking chalk and cheese. Antarctic winter sea ice has grown, but every summer this almost completely melts. It dosn't effect the Earths energy budget. Arctic ice continues to trend down and the dark ocean left after melting absorbs more heat, that melts more ice. It's a feed back!
otipua08 1 week ago
There's a place in Russia where the difference between summer and winter might be more than 100 C (minus 60 C in winter and plus 40 in summer). And this winter hasn't been as harsh, couple weeks around minus 15-20 C, couple days around -25. I'm more concerned about frozen canals in Venice. Thy hadn't such thing in years.
MrSpb77 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
his predictions did happen so far thats why they interviewed him , I do believe this man cuz many scientist the mainstream ones one could say ; for money they are corrupted like he said .those ones who are considered to be the underdog almost always turn out to speak the truth in the end cuz many scientists Ignore new discoveries becuz that would mean all there lifeswork is based on misconceptions they rather not believe new things cuz they think they know it all some humans are so arrogant
NaomII1986 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
NaomII1986 2 weeks ago
what an absolute nutter. Sea ice in the Arctic is falling off a cliff. The Sun and the Moon oh brother!
TenneyNaumer 3 weeks ago
@TenneyNaumer
It is a self evident truth that the sun and to a lesser extent the moon drive the climate .
Global sea ice is increasing as the world has been cooling since 2000 thats why it is now climate change rather than global warming .
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 Err. No one has changed any name. The IPCC was set up in 1988. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It was called climate change then . It's called climate change now!
otipua08 1 week ago
@TenneyNaumer It's fun to throw a few facts into denier fantasy land. Keep up the good work:-)
otipua08 1 week ago
No information here. But what's inforamtion? Another word for bull shxt?
otipua08 3 weeks ago
some great inforamtion here thanks
msjessypp 1 month ago
very interesting video thanks
simysimss 1 month ago
very interesting thanks
smuggecko 1 month ago
No useful information here. Why didn't they interview an actual climate scientist?
otipua08 1 month ago
some great inforamtion here thanks
thegeffc 1 month ago
some sweet info here
prchecker 1 month ago
brilliant video
sprattysy 1 month ago
love the video really good
TheSpikeystuff 1 month ago
some really good stuff here
chrispikeyp 1 month ago
really informative and interesting
MrJonkelp 1 month ago
I completely agree with Piers Corbyn, its a corrupt science, scientists who claim they can prove global warming exists get funding for it because people worry about it, scientists who claim they can prove it doesnt exist dont get funding because no one is worried about it then. And it is the coldest down in Australia that I can remember, 5 years ago wed have entire weeks of over 40 degree (c) days, this summer weve only had about a weeks worth of over 30 degree days, its fucking freezing
iNT3RUT10N 1 month ago
TheHumanity100 2 months ago 8
@TheHumanity100 well temperature is rising due to CO2 and methane gases because they are green house gases. dont tell us to educate ourselves u just copy and pasted earths atmosphere. its not a hoax and look at the temperature increase in the past decade. its not an earth cycle because we are experiencing the 1930's greenhouse gases at the moment (with not too much factory industries at that time). it takes decades for these green house gases to come into play. so stop polluting!
InfectedInHD 1 week ago
This is just two morons arguing opposite sides of something they dont understand.
fozzledoff1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Numerous posts on where is the credible proof to explain climate variation?
Well there is such proof but no one wants to listen. The results demonstrate an unassailable correlation with historic climate data and because the data can be calculated, the future climate patterns can also be calculated, a forecast for the next two decades is shown and we are in for a long cold spell in the Northern hemisphere.
Google Solarchords and see for yourself.
howardsway782 3 months ago
If those scientists will examine those deep sea bed cores and ices cores they will notice that BEFORE ANY ICE AGE OCCURS AN INTENSE HEAT WAVE AND HOT CLIMATE WILL PRECEDE IT TEMPORARILY. Then and only then, the transition to an ice age will occur and that transition period ranges from 1 week to years or even decades and generations. That is why Russia is going to all nuclear power that will it alive right through the coming mini or major ice age! When will people listen to reason!?
darthvader5300 4 months ago
@darthvader5300 : Because reason tells we understand Milankovich cycles and none is scheduled... genius.
nigelelsass 2 months ago
@nigelelsass Politicians must rise against politics, be willing to sacrifice everything politically for the sake of doing what is right during it's 4 yr term. Russia has been listening to it's scientists & understanding the Pre-ice age temperature fluctuations which they have been expecting to come came (heat waves, droughts, high aridity, and wide far ranging fires) At least our oil & gas revenues were used in preparing for these weather catastrophes coming in the future, time is own our side
darthvader5300 2 months ago
@darthvader5300 : Dellusioned person far away from reality... bye
nigelelsass 2 months ago
@nigelelsass We will see who is right but do not ever knock on Russian borders asking for help since we have finished the necessary infra-technostructures needed to protect our people and provide for their needs. You and your kind will alternatingly be freezing and roasting, and suffering from floods and droughts while we Russians are not dellusioned people, far from it we Russians are realists standing on reality and facing reality face to face, you and your kind are not, you poor people, pity!
darthvader5300 2 months ago
@darthvader5300: Oh and the unprecedented combustion of peat layers was only an accident.... oh right you are the realists - whatever - yeah indeed, pity.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@TheBENGALHANNIBAL Father Asia/ what is that, respectfully asking thank you.
BTsmoke 4 months ago
Levels of CO2 are still rising
Anticipate "the earth is cooling" mantra this winter when record cold temperatures are recorded (record sales of Russian gas), and "it's just the Sun" crap when we roast next summer ("it's nothing to do with us")
You only live once
Your descendants can die many times
beachcomber2008 4 months ago
@beachcomber2008 "it's just the Sun" crap ..... I know. All those silly graphs and people trying to make sense. Forget that. It makes my head hurt. Solar activity bs. It's more fun to dream the impossible and destroy the economy.
anywayokay 3 months ago
Has anyone noticed how the SCAM supporters want those who point out the bad science and failed alarmist predictions to give yet more examples of the folly! ROTFLMAO!!!
yaahme 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@yaahme So I take it you have no evidence!
otipua08 4 months ago
AGW is a SCAM!
yaahme 4 months ago
@yaahme What scientific data backs your claim?
otipua08 4 months ago
@yaahme : I have never seen such a well substantiated statement ! USA ! USA! USA!
nigelelsass 2 months ago
Anyone notice how the top comments don't coincide with the likes and dislikes of the clip? Otipua is definitely a dodgy. 490 Thumbs up for the clip, yet number one comment opposes the whole concept of this news story. I wonder how much youtube and the like got paid for manipulating the stats?
ivhoven 5 months ago
@ivhoven I guess most of the denial crowd are too intellectually challenged to find the thumbs down button on the comments. Whoops shouldn't have given that clue away ;-)
otipua08 5 months ago
@ivhoven I guess most of the denial crowd are too intellectually challenged to find the thumbs down button on the comments. Whoops shouldn't have given that clue away ;-)
otipua08 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ivhoven I guess most of the denial crowd are too intellectually challenged to find the thumbs down button on the comments. Whoops shouldn't have given that clue away ;-)
otipua08 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ivhoven I guess most of the denial crowd are too intellectually challenged to find the thumbs down button on the comments. Whoops shouldn't have given that clue away ;-)
otipua08 5 months ago
@ivhoven In an analisis of climate change articles in THE AUSTRALIAN by Robert Maine from 2004 to 2011, it was found there were 700 stories unfavourable and 180 favourable. I guess the advertising dollar speaks louder than the truth from 97% of the worlds climate scientists!
otipua08 5 months ago
Programme kindly sponsered by fossil fuel bohemoth GAZPROM, The second most profitable company on the planet 2010. (31.9billion can sure buy a lot of disinformation)
otipua08 5 months ago
@otipua08 31.9 Billion?! What about the trillion dollar industry that's meant to spawn from this BS?! Nice double standards.
ivhoven 5 months ago
@ivhoven Okay, Gazprom the second most profitable company on the planet at 31.9Billion then number 3 Exxon 30.5b, Number 5 Shell 20.1b, 8 Petrobas 19.1, number 9 Chevron 19b and just missing the top 10 petronas at 17billion. How does your trillion $ fantasy industry of the future compare?
otipua08 5 months ago
@ivhoven Okay, Gazprom the second most profitable company on the planet at 31.9Billion then number 3 Exxon 30.5b, Number 5 Shell 20.1b, 8 Petrobas 19.1, number 9 Chevron 19b and just missing the top 10 petronas at 17billion. How does your trillion $ fantasy industry of the future compare?
otipua08 5 months ago
@ivhoven Actually they true giants of the oil industry are the state owned companies such as Saudi Aramco,but they don't publish finances. Then there's the private oil giants like Koch industries. Then big coal and the auto makers have a big interest in BAU also.
otipua08 5 months ago
There is no way the third world can develop without cheap electricity and you cannot run a factory on a trickle of unreliable energy from solar panels or windmills that stop when its dark and not windy! They have natural resources and this is a plot to prevent them using them to develop and compete with the rest of the world.
yogbert 5 months ago
@yogbert What natural resources? Nice conspiracy theory.
otipua08 5 months ago
@otipua08 What natural resources?! You are actually now most definitely the ultimate simpleton I have ever had the unfortunate opportunity to have to bear witness. It is the most resource rich continent in the world. That's a fact. Not a debatable one like your Climate "theories". If you want to go live in a hut without electricity go for it. The rest of us will continue our way of life.
ivhoven 5 months ago
@ivhoven Nice to hear from you again. I do shake my head though, so many insults and so few facts. ( actually no facts )
otipua08 5 months ago
@ivhoven Just asked what natural resources you are referring to. You really think insults strengthen your argument. No, actually only verifiable facts can do that
otipua08 5 months ago
Last year Britain and Europe saw the coldest snowiest winter since the one I remember in 1980 it was probably colder last winter than 1980 so we can all play the game where its hotter now than before as it was colder last year than before. The fact is climate is simply eratic. The real issue here is not about us and what we can do to save ourselves but the third world and how can they develop.
yogbert 5 months ago
@otipua08 These figures are manipulated to show the desired result. 20 years ago 6000 points of temp measurement were taken against only 1500 today using an average temp. With the example of California where there are deserts, beaches and mountains they no longer use a temp measure from the mountains yet they still compare the temps when they used to measure the mountains!!!
yogbert 5 months ago
There is no proof that Co2 has an effect on global temperature. There is proof that computer models produced by the UN and IPCC have been manipulated to show their desired result of warming. There is proof of global cooling but that has been hidden from public view.
The world's temperature changes naturally all the time in a chaotic manner which is what makes prediction so tricky.
AGW is simply huge business making certain people rich from taxing the public.
yogbert 5 months ago
@yogbert All the scientific organisations studying the subject say there is proof. 2010 was the hottest year on record, The 2000's the hottest decade.
otipua08 5 months ago
@yogbert You are a very intelligent person. Keep it up.
ivhoven 5 months ago
@yogbert Actually the combined effect of the green house gases has been known about for over a century. I am afraid your statement about CO2 having no effect on global temperature is just nonsense. Without these gases the temperature of the Earth would on average be 33degC lower!
otipua08 5 months ago 6
@otipua08 do you now how much co2 from volcano activities and methane gases is produces every year non human? co2 from human is nothing the man is telling something simple, is a solar and lunar activities the problem, that is the real deal.... bad solar activity= more co2 to heat the planet, ice is melt= pressure in water= volcanoes to blow to cold down the planet. is a natural protection, we are too small to feel the time of this process, human create problems= reaction them solution!
RaulHHO 2 months ago
@RaulHHO Emissions of CO2 by volcanoes amount to about 300million tonnes per year (US Geological Survey). Emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels amounts to 30 Billion Tonnes per year (EIA figures) or 100 times more than volcanoes.
otipua08 2 months ago
@RaulHHO Methane in the atmosphere has increased from 700 parts per billion before the industial revolution to 1800 ppb now. Sources include emissions from rumanant livestock and rices paddies. Inceasing population and dietary changes have resulted in increased emissions. As the Earth warms and permafrost melts, methane is being released in greater quantities from high latitude tundra also.
otipua08 2 months ago
@RaulHHO Climate scientists know the sun is not the cause of the current warming. The solar cycle has just come out of an extended minimum and still 2010 was the hottest year on record, tied with 2005. 2011 was the 10th warmest on record which was an achievement because La Nina years are usually much cooler. It was the hottest La Nina year on record.
otipua08 2 months ago
@otipua08 According to the Max plank institute for solar systems they have proof that the sun has increased its brightness and heat output. You are spreading global warming propaganda (lies). you alarmist nazi brain washed gullible fuckwit.
vmgqie 2 months ago
@vmgqie Have you even bothered to check the bull shit you are spewing. Google Max Planck Institute solar irradiance and try to read the simple graph that shows declining irradiance and increasing temperature you simpleton.
otipua08 2 months ago
@otipua08 That was sun spots graph you dumb cunt. they have another study which says, the sun's has increased its heat and its brilliance. Done by a scientist named Dr Sami Solonky or something like that, so there alarmist nazi
vmgqie 2 months ago
@vmgqie I see I have to make it simpler for you. Horizontal axis time. Verticle axis both solar irradiance per metre sq and average global temperature anomaly from mean. Duh!
otipua08 2 months ago
@otipua08 I will make it simple for you, your a wacko alarmist nazi turd, stick that in your ass and see if that fits dickhead
vmgqie 1 month ago
@vmgqie Enough. Keep yuor bullshit to yourself. Don't contact me again.
otipua08 1 month ago
@otipua08 truth hurts dickhead
vmgqie 1 month ago
@otipua08
33 deg C lower !
0.036% of co2 ?
1/3 of 1 % of the Earth's atmosphere keeps in all that heat ?
Maybe we could make insulation out of co2 ?
hopeintruth1 2 weeks ago
@hopeintruth1 That's right. The combined effect of the greenhouse gases including the now0.0392% of CO2, is around 33deg C. Google "wiki greenhouse gases" for more information. Without these gases planet earth would have a climate similar to the moon with extremes of up to 123deg during the day and -233deg at night. The bulk of the atmosphere,Nitrogen and Oxygen, do not have these greenhouse properties.
otipua08 2 weeks ago
@otipua08
Agree or disagree with my positions you can see who I am and what I believe on my youtube page . I just had a look at your youtube home page and its blank .
Maybe you are a minion of the oil companies that are owned by the big multinational banks that stand to make trillions out of the global warming nonsense ?
Or maybe you are just a useful idiot who is scientifically illiterate ?
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 You can't hold a discussion without resorting to conspiracy theories?That only happens when there are no facts to support your position. I don't use my Youtube account much, but if you click onto my otipua08 icon in the top right hand corner you will see my history, if that interests you.I can assure you I don't work for any fossil fuel related industry. They are actually the ones funding the denialist campaign.
otipua08 1 week ago
@otipua08
All the big oil companies support the global warming theory and stand to make a fortune from it . All BIG OIL COMPANIES ! Cui bono , who benefits ?
As for empirical evidence , atmospheric physicist , MIT Professor of Meteorology for 27 years and former IPCC lead author Richard S. Lindzen is one of THOUSANDS !!! Thats right THOUSANDS !!! of climate scientists who does not believe the climate alarmist nonsense .
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 So. How exactly do fossil fuel companies benefit from attempts to reduce the use of their product thru regulation? In my experiace they are the ones actually funding your denialist campaign.
otipua08 1 week ago
@otipua08
Exxon WAS THE LAST OF THE BIG OIL COMPANIES TO GO ALONG WITH THE WARMING ALARMISTS .
IF YOU CAN SELL LESS OIL FOR MORE MONEY ITS A GOOD DAY FOR BIG OIL .
WHEN THE US INVADED IRAQ THEY DIDNT PUMP MORE OIL THEY PUMPED MUCH LESS , THIS Drives up the prise and the oil companies make a fortune .
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 Why was exxon funding an organisation deliberatly trying to spread denialist psuedo-science then?Google heartland institute wiki. Look up funding.
otipua08 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 Thousands of climate scientists??? You are't refering to the OISM petition are you? Last time I looked they had 39 scientists working in climate science. The rest were vets, docters, teachers or whatever. A chimpanzee could have signed it and never checked. The document circulated with the petition amounted to scientific fraud, according to the national acadamy of sciences. It's been circulating for 15 years and they only managed 39.LOL
otipua08 1 week ago
@otipua08
The great weight of scientists who support the warming alarmists do so because there jobs depended on it .
Consensus and the scientific method are, in fact, incompatible concepts. If consensus ruled science, the sun would still be circling the earth .
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@otipua08
The largest % of greenhouse gas in our atmosphere by a huge amount is water vapour .
CO2 is irrelevant and has little effect on the climate .
The worlds monetary system is based on the petrodollar and like all fiat money it is about to crash . The international banks need a replacement and carbon credits are it .
hopeintruth1 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 You are correct. Water vapour is the most abundant greenhouse gas, however, H2O cannot drive temperature. For H2O vapour to incease in the atmosphere, temperature must increase first, otherwise the air becomes saturated and it rains. H2O is a feedback gas, it compounds the effect of CO2. CO2 traps the infra-red radiation heating the atmosphere and forces temperatures higher.
otipua08 1 week ago
@hopeintruth1 In my opinion carbon trading is a waste of time and as you say, only serve to make money for those trading them. I doubt that they will genuinely reduce emissions. To combust fossil fuels and release CO2 that has been sequestered from a historical geological era, cannot be remedied by planting trees and claiming credits.
otipua08 1 week ago
Comment removed
NaomII1986 2 weeks ago
'Gob-smacking' scale of Petermann Glacier break-up’
w ww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-mid-wales-14771523
blackadderthe4 6 months ago
CARBON DIOXIDE IS NOT A POLLUTANT!
ivhoven 6 months ago
@ivhoven Try breathing it at a atmospheric concentration above 5%
otipua08 6 months ago
@ivhoven It is a greenhouse gas. Burning fossil fuels is increasing it's concentration in the atmosphere. Temperature records show temperatures rising. The suns output,cosmic rays and the earths orbit are not causing the temperature increase. Computer models confirm the warming so far experienced was caused by human emmissions and extrapolated forward indicate a destablised climate.
otipua08 5 months ago
@otipua08 A greenhouse gas? What happens to plants in a greenhouse? They flourish. Since you seem to be an expert on the matter, pray tell, what is the temperature of the earth? And what was is it 50 years ago? The reality is noone can judge the temperature of the earth, CLIMATE CHANGE is real, MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE is the grass roots of the creation of a global currency. ENVIRONMENTALISM is a new religion. Go and hug the trees, and kiss my ASS.
ivhoven 5 months ago
@ivhoven I give up! What is the temperature of the earth? I guess you are the expert. You seem to know there's been no warming since 1950. Tell me your information source. Hope your arse is clean I'm all puckered up.
otipua08 5 months ago
@otipua08 Thats exactly my point you, nor any other scientists can answer the question, but will say with unrelenting confidence that the EARTH is warming, yet no one can quantify the earths temperature. Climate gate proved it all a sham, the manipulation of figures to suit the elite. My ass is clean, but you'll be puckering up to the elitists cartels who will be sticking it right up their sonny. Stick it to the man, or the man will stick it in you. You are a victim of propaganda. Read a book.
ivhoven 5 months ago
@ivhoven wow I almost choked on that one.LOL.. You took that lying fox media beat up seriously. Amazing. Gullible. Whatever. I guess those greenhouse plants are sucking up all that CO2 from fossil fuel emmissions. Oh, hang on, the concentration in the atmosphere has increased from 280ppm to 392ppm.
otipua08 5 months ago
@otipua08 LIE!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA. You are a deluded propaganda infested simpleton. Fox news!? We dont even have fox news in Australia. What we do have though is a better education, better University System, and a populous who thinks for themselves. Unlike you who has clearly been brainwashed. Btw, what does your name mean?
ivhoven 5 months ago
@ivhoven You're an Aussie. Gidday ocker! I should have mentioned Rupert Murdocks Aussie assets instead then "The Australian" "Daily telegraph"," Foxtel" etc. "The News of the world" scandal should be a warning to you about the motivation and reliability of this tabliod denial propaganda. Sorry about the multiple posts.
otipua08 5 months ago
@ivhoven Oh yea. The global temperature for august was 16.15deg C compared to the 20th century average of 15.60.NOAA website. I'll see if I can track down the 1950 Temp.
otipua08 5 months ago
@otipua08 You are gonna sit there and tell me that Man can quantify THE ENTIRE GLOBES TEMPERATURE?! You are actually deluded. The globe has so many different weather patterns all over the world to suggest one can even average these out (if all are even attainable) and substantiate a global temperature is Arrogant and naive. You clearly are a very uneducated individual. Its ok, continue to let someone else do the thinking for you.
ivhoven 5 months ago
hey I have an idea, if the climate change crowd wants to gain creditability shut Al Gore up, climate change or not the world will be a better place.
scrapdaddy811 6 months ago
How about Hillary's lies about "taking gunfire flack" getting off a plane when she went to Yugoslavia back in the 90s which was found to be total b.s.. But heck, she's actually Secretary of State and you'd vote for her too even tho' she's a proven liar, right?
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558 :
What you say has absolutely no relevance - it is plain anger at some politicians of your country. You are confused and angry.
nigelelsass 6 months ago
"You are confused and angry."
I am not confused as I have a pretty good idea as to what the globalists and environmentalists have in mind for U.S citizens. And yes I am angry and I have a right to speak out against the forces that wish destroy U.S. prosperity. Maybe u don't always have the right to speak out where ever ur from, but we Americans still have that right ---tho we currently have a President who wishes to Gaia for all speech to reflect only the views of his administration.
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : The "forces that wish to destroy U.S. prosperity" - I am glad you included the "wish" as US prosperity has mostly been reduced by decisions taken by American people.
In my experience, you are a country of angry and undereducated conspiracy theorists who can only live under a threat - whether real or inaginary - because that is how you live the past 60 years and have no other way to exist.
I have a higher prosperity and degree of freedom where I am from (just FYI).
nigelelsass 6 months ago
What a load of horseshit.
NightHawk92929 6 months ago
Oh and by the way, ignore the junk by 'verchorik' below also, for example:
A spokesperson BOEMRE, Michael Bromwich, where Monnett works, has has stated that "the agency placed Mr. Monnett on administrative leave for reasons having nothing to do with scientific integrity, his 2006 journal article, or issues related to permitting, as has been alleged. Any suggestions or speculation to the contrary are wrong." The suspension only has to do with the proceedures of awarding of a contract for a study
Rundstedt1 7 months ago
Corbyn is a quack, he's the one making money off of his phony science; real scientists work on science for respect of the field and to gain knowledge, not for profit like Corbyn. He's a disgusting human being, nobody should give him airtime.
Rundstedt1 7 months ago
Exxon, BP, et al don't bother me as much as the global warmists who want a global carbon tax. if I don't want or need gas, I don't visit an Exxon or BP station. If we belive the lies of Al Gore and the pseudo-scientists at EAU, we eventually all get screwed with $8/gal. for gasoline and a hidden carbon tax -- and this based on sketchy, junk science. Remember 'hide the decline' and 'we can't account for the lack of warming' proof that the warmists are dishonest and have a very specific agenda.
wildnites558 7 months ago
It's about time those brave, humble public servants like Exxon, BP, Shell, Chevron, Total, and ConoccoPhillips struggling to get by on their meager $140 billion / year combined revenue stood up to those 300,00 fat-cat scientists who're living large on the National Science Foundation's extravagant $6 billion / year research "gravy train." As one such fat-cat who's been living the high life on $17k / year, few things would please me more than to see Corbyn run over by an SUV--except maybe a hybrid
godzilla1979 7 months ago
I wonder what all of you pseudo skeptics will be saying when it will get so bad, even you will have to realize that you were on the wrong side of history. Like all the other anti scientific ideologists, those who defended smoking, opposed vaccination, proposed slavery and so on. The blood of the millions of people who will suffer will be on your hands, too.
StarcrossedPacific 7 months ago
Sounds to me like you're hoping for a disaster. Many people defend smoking not from any scientific point of view but simply because they enjoy the pleasure of smoking. Don't know why, personally I hate the smell of it. Most of the people who "defend tobacco" today just wish to smoke regardless of what the science says. Unless you're talking about the bogus studies of the 1950s when big tobacco was paying doctors and scientists to cover up critical data like the global warmists are doing today.
wildnites558 7 months ago
@wildnites558 : You mean like skeptics are pushing over and over again the list of 31,000 scientists created by F.Seitz .... who precisely conducted over 40 research on the link between cancer and tobacco without ever showing a link (thanks to grants from Tobacco companies)... well here you go - the same people (F.Seitz and F.Singer) have been in the same "denialist boat" whether on GW or tobacco - also part of the donors were the same.
nigelelsass 6 months ago 2
Using the tobacco argument is apple 'n oranges. I hate tobacco and I always believed that the industry worked dilligently to hold back critical information about tobacco -- which would have saved millions of lives. The slam-dunk facts about the dangers of tobacco use were well known decades before warning labels showed up showed up on cigarette packs. G.W., on the other hand is false and phony science and most of it is insidiously designed by the U.N. to micro-manage national economies.
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : Well you can believe that the guy who outright lied to you about tobacco this time received money from the same lobbying group to "expose the truth on global warming" without have any hidden interest. It is however extremely naive.
GW is demonstrated in the specific change of radiative forcing at specific absorption bands of man-made greenhouse gases and nothing and nobody was able ton invalidate this formal proof - then again you are free not to trust this hard fact.
nigelelsass 6 months ago
I'll believe whatever I want to believe based on my own investigations. I don't take one single person's word for it - i try to look at the facts. People can get it wrong, people can misinform and people can outright lie. U love Bubba Clinton don't U? How many outright lies did he tell ---and yet you and most leftist/liberals would vote for him in a heartbeat if he ran for POTUS again, wouldn't you? EAU got caught in a major lie, but you still believe them, right?
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558 :
1) I do not care about US politicians
2) I am not a US citizen
3) The scientific debate does not care about the US political field (although your are very confused and tend to think they are one and the same).
4) I am not leftist or liberal
5) You need to solve your anger issues (also your confusion) - before you can discuss anything seriously
nigelelsass 6 months ago
Furthermore, I don't wish to deny you any belief you have.Im not a denialist. I'm for debate -- unlike the left. Al Gore ducked any debate. The American media pretty much eschews any national debate on G.W. It's the liberals, and globalists who don't want to debate because they know full-well when the facts come out about the profound inaccuracies on so-called G.W. people, en masse, might have second thoughts - and the globalists don't want second thoughts because it only delays their time-line.
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : Again you can believe that 97% of all the 1,300+ scientists with 20 or more publications in atmospheric science are wrong and the isolated position of the majority (not all) US right wing is right - even though formal proof shows a strong increase in radiative forcing to be the result of human acitivites.
In this debate, AlGore is just a parasite which has lead to the polarization.
nigelelsass 6 months ago
@nigelelsass I'll have to look that one up myself. But again, consensus or majority is not science.
"even though formal proof shows a strong increase in radiative forcing to be the result of human acitivites."
What the heck does this mean??! Sounds like some re-worded gobbledy-gook by lefties who have been frustrated in their desire to set up a world body to institue a global carbon tax and micro-manage national economies. Too bad about the EAU debacle, it shined the light of truth on GW.
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : This is precisely why the debate should be left to scientists - and I leave medicine to MDs (people who have studied it) and I am humble enough not to pretend having any meaningful opinion in the field. Submitting a medical decision to the democratic process (= non experts) can be dangerous.
If you would have had spectral absorption physics in high school or university, you would know what it means.
nigelelsass 6 months ago
"This is precisely why the debate should be left to scientists"
Pure B.S. Here we go again. There's BEEN NO DEBATE, SKPPY!! The scientists on the side of AGW don't want debate or at least the ones controlling the whole hoax don't want debate. They deispise the fact the we free Americans have a say in our politics, that we can vote someone out of office whose policies we disagree with. And quite frankly, if science has the potential to attenuate my livelyhood as an American, I will be heard!!
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : There is a debate - my guess is however that you imagine that a scientific debate is something in the columns of the WSJ which would show how little you understand about science.
Do you have an access to Elsevier, Springerlink or Sciencedirect? NO? Then do not whine about "no debate". Because you have ignored something does not mean it does not exist. The world doesn't revolve around you.
nigelelsass 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : I am just wondering - do you also go after specialists of all fields because you do not understand their own lingo and own field - therefore there must be a conspiracy???
Once again you link science and politics. At least the IPCC has the decency to keep them in totally separated chapters....
PS: because you do not understand something does not mean it is false or direct against you.
nigelelsass 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : I do not see the interest of "American debates" as they consist in recycling information and extrapolated opinions from mass media, with a very low level of accuracy (add to this a bit of conspiracy theories , fears and lack or rationality). I frankly do not see the interest in it. The debates consist mostly in putting into the hands of non-experts a complexity they cannot master. It would be like asking from me a medical opinion I cannot provide (and do not claim to be able to)
nigelelsass 6 months ago
I do not see the interest of "American debates" as they consist in recycling information and extrapolated opinions from mass media, with a very low level of accuracy"
Says you. Real scientific debates never happened--at least not publicly. The left and the globalists like it that way so they can institute political policies most people would never believe in or vote for. Of course you don't see interest in a debate where the fate of a nation's economy is at stake - you have a "warmist" agenda.
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : REAL SCIENTIFIC DEBATES DO NOT HAPPEN IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE !!! People would turn off their TV after the first set of data and equations !!! This is why science is discussed in the peer review process which consists in mutual criticism. You can see it all if you have an access to Elsevier, Springlink, Sciencedirect, etc.
You commit a first mistake if you mix science/ policy - and do not want to dissociate the science from the policy discussion; how are you different form AlGore?
nigelelsass 6 months ago
@nigelelsass Uh Skippy, In the US they do in fact happen in the public. Especially, when the consequences of these leftist policies by those who are the enemies of freedom can have a major impact on American lives and our ways of living, then you BETTER BELIEVE WE"LL BE PART OF THE DEBATE! And woe be it to any politician who subjects the American taxpaying voter to some band of U.N globalist neo-Marxists who see the U.S. taxpayers as a cash cow to fund their inept global misadventures.
wildnites558 6 months ago
@wildnites558: I live in a country with much stricter environmental regulations - we are more free and prosperous - we have a center-right green party.
You are an all angry and messed-up country.
FYI: What the US has spent on its wasteful wars is more than 5x what was asked to solve the climate crisis - I do not even speak on what you have spent on the housing bubble. You are not a "cash cow" - dream on - you are at best a "cash waste" and parasite to the financial system,
nigelelsass 6 months ago
@wildnites558 : The US which has ruined the world prosperity accusing others of U.N. globalist neo-Marxist who see the US as cash cow.... WITH WHICH CASH ???? You are bankrupt my dear, unlike my country which posted a budget surplus.
You are totally messed-up and one can only laugh at your claims. The thing the US is the best at is destroying itself and exporting its problems and crisis. Frankly if I were a citizen of your lousy country I would remain silent (and get my acts in order).
nigelelsass 6 months ago
@nigelelsass Don't you mean the "p2p" review process? hahaha. buddies marking each others papers.
m1aws 2 months ago
@m1aws : GENIUS - publish something - then we´ll speak.
Oh right and the system is totally stupid, we should have people like you without any degree in science review scientific papers... also Ayatollahs and Mujaheedeen in the review panel, right? idiot.
nigelelsass 2 months ago
@nigelelsass Would you like me to have it peer to peer reviewed too? I'll get a few buddies together to give it weight. hahaha. As if the systems not stupid. Out of the 5.5 million papers in the past few years. What has been accomplished apart from too little. Einstein put one paper forward about gravity waves and it was rejected by his mathematician buddy.
Stop being a loser religious arsewipe too.
No GW in the past decade and the trend is down! Get over it.
m1aws 2 months ago
RT - such a reliable source on this topic. Ditto Piers Corbyn -- an absolutely disgraceful allegation.
xchopp 7 months ago
Why do people attack those that say Man made Climate Change is Bullshit, but with the Al-Gore streotypes they just sit hanging on every word. The great thing about the CO2 Scam is, it will never ever end. Even if man reduces emissions by 100%, there will still be CO2 created and the Climate will Continue to Change. And the CO2 hoax will Continue for even more money.
JPMorganMustDie 7 months ago
This is the guy who claimed that there would be major earthquakes and severe weather June 27-July 2 and nothing notable happened. Just like most crackpots, he makes bold predictions and then when on occasion he is right he trumpets them to support his pseudo scientific view. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. This man is either a schill for the petroleum industry, or a madman.
ronpaulbot 7 months ago
@ronpaulbot The oil companies all support the carbon tax scheme. They are all in with this scam. So calling someone a shill for the petroleum industry will not work anymore.
RustyL121 7 months ago
If Piers is so confident in his results, why doesn't he get his predictions tested by independent reviewers?
TheGamanic 7 months ago
Can't believe they're wanting to teach more about climate change to children in schools. As Prue MacSween so perfectly put it, it's taking us back to the hitler era where young minds are being fed propaganda to serve the beneficiaries of carbon tax.
FallenG0d 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
One day, not so far in our future, all the green plants of the world united in agreement when a couple of plants convinced all the rest of them that oxygen was a deadly gas and it needed to be reduced to save the planet they lived in and all life on it.
Hmmm, does that make sense? About as much sense as Al Gore's agenda of 'climate change' and reducing carbon dioxide.
paulcoonan 7 months ago
wow, listen to this toolbox "interviewer"
basscataz 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Willie Soon, one of the scientific figures who claimed to be skeptical about climate change, has admitted to being paid more than $1 million in the past decade by major U.S. oil and coal companies. June 29, 2011
swordsintopens 8 months ago
GOP SAYS CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX ! NATURE SAYS GOP IS A HOAX !!!
kn9ioutom 8 months ago 2
I don't care about the science. I care about the planet.
charlesfrith 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
-=OBEY CLIMATE COPS=-
oi52.tinypic.
com/jt1jxj.jpg
-=OBEY CLIMATE CRIMINALS=-
oi52.tinypic.
com/2wpmn83.jpg
NikFromNYC 9 months ago
Carbon tax is a hoax.
Capitancanguro1 9 months ago
Always trust a well spoken scientist with fucked up hair. He may seem crazy today, but he will be admired for his truth later.
-Einstein's Corpse
SeppLainer 9 months ago
The very same climate hoaxters met in Stockholm this week, to ram through a new policy for global population reduction, which will be presented to the UN and put on the agenda at the Rio Summit next year.
What they didn't expect, was that they would be exposed by a small group of protesters outside. Watch this video:
watch?v=srYHFbom4Rc
This is a new coup attempt that needs to be exposed worldwide!
LAROUCHEpunktSE 9 months ago
And the part that scares me, is this idiot actually Believes what he's talking about o.O being blind to the effects of Co2 just because he doesn't want to believe it, or admit that he's full of shit.
Wulvar 10 months ago
People dont be ignorant and educate yourself before believing in the climate change propaganda. It is true that the climate change is not caused by humans and the hienas of the new world order spread the propaganda. The same was with swine flue, sars and bird flue. Propaganda, propaganda, propaganda! Just the way of making BIG money.
thatsanna 10 months ago
@thatsanna .... that will be HARD if people educated themselved in SPECTRAL ABSORBTION PHYSICS and actually see on an experimental basis the effect of greenhouse gases.
My physics teacher didn't lie to me and I clearly recall identifying the spectral absorbtion range of specific greenhouse gases.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
The fossil fuel industry must love this guy. Wonder if he's making any money spreading their message?
otipua08 10 months ago 8
@otipua08
why not? Phil Jones, M. Mann et al did spreading the meretricious nonsense the warmist promote.
GhenisCanne 6 months ago
@otipua08 Your wrong... Al gore is a scam... he wants you to pay for breathing... Fossile fules does not go down because of carbon tax... its going UP.. And that means with carbon tax that YOU are paying more to the master conman Al Gore (Globalist NWO SCUM)..
hearv888 5 months ago