Heres a theory,With each revolution around our sun we are getting closer to our sun.you know those round bowls you drop pennys down and they go round and round getting closer and closer and closer to the center and speed up as they get there.BUT could be the opposite (expanding) accompanied by increased solar activity. If you look at venus it looks like a young pre-earth if you look at mars it looks like a dead old-earth.
However i lean more towards implosion because satellites eventually fall
@fawkUtube - we are currently moving away from the sun and towards sirius - venus was originally an ice comet, and is therefore not like the other planets. mars has been stripped of the atmosphere it once had. it was once populated on eh surface, now it is just populated inside , as all planets are..
@SovereignBeing meh i just found out October 1st a comet hit the sun thats why its been so hot just now cooling off i dont believe in hollow earth other than d.u.m.b.s eaverytthing has cycles thats what life is all about
i pour a quart of oil down the sink when i get up in the morning. I set a few tires on fire and turn everything on in the house and that's before breakfast.And i make sure everything i eat for breakfast came from at least 4000 miles away.
I find it funny that the Prius has a digital plant icon in the dash that grows the the more efficient you drive i thought it was funny because plants need CO2 maybe plants should have a gauge for humans less oxygen is good?
Too shallow; outdated; doesn't reveal true facts of mmgw. The plan is not to ban CO2 - yes its needed by plants - idiot position - we just have too much CO2. IS IT THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND? Or the agenda here is to mislead & warp the facts?
FYI, Norway mass murderer Anders Breivik spouted this same mindless conspiracy theory in his manifesto. Too self-absorbed and scientifically ignorant to deal with the basic physics of CO2 in the atmosphere. Everything has to be a big damned conspiracy against the "rights" of right-wing douches to pollute and pillage however they please.
Yes CO2 is very beneficial to life. So is DUNG. Plants love the stuff. So by denialist logic, dung can't be pollution.
I guess then denialists won't mind having a wadd of dung in their morning cereal, or a steady stream of the life promoting dung in their drinking water.
CO2 is a metabolic waste product. That is why your body is constantly excreting it into the surrounding air.
If it didn't, you would die within a couple of minutes.
Pretty dramatic effect for a trace gas, wouldn't you say?
@AtomSmash3r Carbon dioxide is colourless, odourless, tasteless, therefore comparing it to dung is completely misleading. But since you want to show what it means using cereal as an analogy CO2 is like adding a tiny bit more of a tiny section of the cereal, even though it won't change anything just make it better for you.
@LMacleodovich Sorry but comparing CO2 to dung is completely appropriate since they are both metabolic waste products excreted from the body. CO2 is poisonous, which is why your body goes to great lengths to expell it from your bodily tissues.
@AtomSmash3r What?? CO2 is a natural beneficial gas and the reason for all the concern is that somehow adding 3% more to a gas that only makes up 0.038% of the atmosphere is going to cause harmful temperature changes. It is not poisonous because the amount which is being put in the atmosphere is not harmful to any living thing, which is why it cannot be a pollutant. It has nothing to do with how CO2 is an excretement.
@LMacleodovich CO2 is a natural beneficial gas. It is also toxic. Try holding your breath for 3 to 4 minutes and tell how if feels as that beneficial CO2 gas builds up in your blood stream.
Sorry but plants and animals find high levels of CO2 toxic. This includes the human animal. CO2 makes bodies of water acidic, killing sea, lake, and river life. CO2 traps infrared and warms the earth. Currently, it is about 2 Watts for every square meter of Earth's surface.
That is why CO2 deposited into the atmosphere by man is pollution.
@LMacleodovich Due to mans CO2 pollution. Rapid changes in global climate are anticipated to - and already obesrved to be causing extinction pressure on the Biosphere. Habitat loss, is the primary reason for extinction, and estimates of species loss due to projected warming exceed 40%.
Pretty dramatic affect for a trace gas wouldn't you say?
@AtomSmash3r ive been readong up on both sides of the story and tbh there seems to be a lag time where temperature effects Co2 levels (not the other way around as Al gore said).... using models calculated ONLY from our last "mini-iceage" is misleading. Go back thousands of years and the data supports that what is occurring now is a completely natural state and damn you aussie government praying on ill-informed paranoia
@hoonz97 The only LAG is in your understanding on basic climate science.
The driving factor in the earths climate for the last million years has been changes in the earth's orbital and rotational parameters. CO2 has been a feedback to that effect hence CO2 lagging temperature historically. HOWEVER - CO2 is in the driver seat NOW because it is being artificially boosted through the burning of carbon based fuels.
CO2 can either lead or lag temeprature depending on what is doing the driving.
@hoonz97 No, the data supports that what is occuring now is NOT natural.
Attribution studies have shown that a 0.5'C rise in temperature that is not sustained is within the statistical noise of the climate. However the change is now 0.75'C and the rise has been sustained for the decades, illustrating that the change is not a statistical fluke or within natural variation.
@LMacleodovich You are also wrong about CO2 being colourless since it absorbs colours of light in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum. That region is merely invisible to the human eye.
@AtomSmash3r Carbon dioxide is officially colourless, that is a fact, the statement however that carbon dioxide is a pollutant is false. Carbon dioxide is beneficial to plants, 97% of it is produced by nature and it is a harmless compound. If we truly wanted to make the planet greener, we will continue this production of carbon dioxide as there is no evidence to link it to harmful warming, but substantial evidence to link it to benefits to wildlife.
@LMacleodovich CO2 has colour, that is a scientific fact. Just because the human eye can't see something does not mean it is not there.
Yes CO2 is beneficial to plants, so is Shit and Piss. Are you going to argue that Shit and Piss cannot be pollution because it is beneficial to plants? Foolish.
CO2 is not harmless, it is toxic. Sure CO2 in small amounts is harmless, but so is Arsenic in small amounts, and also beneficial. Why not try to increase your bodies Arsenic content by .014%?
The first video was pretty shocking...It's hard to believe how someone could write something so ridiculous. Slippery slope argument, straw man, argument from ignorance.
I think it's clear that somethings that we may need to survive can also be harmful to the planet.
"some politicians want to label CO2 a pollutant" lol. It's just that the large majority of scientist and their findings urge politicians to make unpopular decisions. everyone knows CO2 is a natural gas, but as in any substance, the dose makes the difference. Ever tried eating 1kg of harmless salt? Fools.
@TheAjumma True but you are forgetting that we produce 3% of the CO2 on the planet, and we definetely already don't have over 30 kg of salt in our bodies. A 50 kg person only has 200g of salt so it is like having 6 grams of salt and saying that it is disastrous to our bodies.
So, lets say global warning doesn't exist... Just take warming temperatures out of the equation all together. What would the benefits be of a world that didn't burn fossil fuels? Hmm, well we would be able to see Mount Ranier clearly from downtown Seattle, we could breath better, there would be far less maintenance on our cars if we all went electric, we wouldn't have to give a big chunk of money to oil producing countries just to have their people fly planes into our buildings...
@wpederson1 I totally agree. We shouldn't need a climate catastrophe, to realize that smog is bad! lol. This change will come about one heart at a time. We need to start asking questions like: Do I really need a car with a 5.6 liter engine?" Do I really need my house temp to be constanly at a cumfy 72 degrees? Do I need to go out on a joy ride? Can I plant a garden instead of a lawn? Do we really need this many buildings lit up all night?
Anthropogenic Global Warming is caused by human increases in fossil fuel CO2 PPM from 300 PPM for the last 800,000 years at least to the industrial revolution, to 390 PPM now.
@Sugardaddy501 Beginning with the industrial revolution the average temperature has steadily become warmer and warmer, with the last decade being the warmest on record. That is just a fact.
There's still a lot of nutters out there claiming global warming is a hoax. Don't let them fool you, go to a source you can really trust. I trust what I read in encyclopedias, and they've been telling the same story about global warming for thirty years: humans are causing it, and it's very bad.
You can even look at wikipedia, but don't just trust the article, look at the discussion page where you can see all the paranoid fantasies being shot down one after another.
@pvolt Again, you clearly don't go to university because the first thing they say is don't use Wikipedia as a reference BECAUSE anyone can edit them to put any fact they want in it...
@nuggetsww False. The wikipedia page on Global Warming is locked. But if you believe you have a correction, look at the *discussion* page, where it may have already been addressed.
BTW, does your university have a policy on Glenn Beck?
@pvolt CO2 is not a pollutant you fool...it is what plants breath...it is what we produce naturally on this planet...the levels humans add is not even one eruption of Mount St. Helens over 100 years of all humanity on earth it would take to equal one volcanic eruption...sooo....do your research...we are NOT causing global warming...WE ARE however polluting in many other ways which need much more attention than the energy thing...that is a hoax to control people...plenty of power exists forever!
Denialists often make your claim about volcanoes, but in fact the USGS’s own web site makes that accurate claim that in any given year, all of the worlds volcanoes produce less than 1% of the CO2 that man produces.
You really should try and find reliable sources of information, not CrackPot nonsense posted on denialist bloggs.
GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX TO IMPOSE A GLOBAL CARBON TAX THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED ON EVERY NECESSITY AND COMMODITY. IF A GLOBAL CARBON TAX IS PASSED 1 BILLION PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO DIE WITHIN ONE DECADE OF IT'S PASSING. THE GLOBAL ELITE, THE ENVIRONMENTALIST SPEWING THIS PROPAGANDA, IGNORE POLLUTION,DEFORESTATION, CHEMICAL DUMPING, AND RADIATION IN ORDER TO FOCUS ON THE REDUCING THE CHEMICAL THAT WE BREATH AND PLANTS NEED TO SURVIVE. THIS IS A LIE. EVIL EXIST AND IS PRESENT.
The CO2 story in this video is rediculous. There is a cycle on earth wich produces a lot of CO2 and consumes a lot of oxygen but it is taken in again by plants. For every mol of CO2 that is emitted, on mol of CO2 has to be taken from the atmosphere first.
The point is that fossil fuels which have been in the earth for a long time are being burned and this introduces new CO2 to the atmosphere.
@frank8910 So tell us retards how you know where the balance is? The earth does a great job in maintaining a balance. Even the earth can't keep a perfect balance. What is considered too much or too few? Why do people like you get to decide what is too much anyway? Were you around billions of years ago? Did you create the earth? The answer is no on all counts. You don't know more or less than any of the retards you think your talking to. You are just as ignorant as the rest of us.
IF the earth is doing a great job at maintaining a balance, why are we plagged by more weather extremes than before and why are gobal average temperature increase fast (doesn't seem like a balance to me or any statistitian).
@frank8910 and when a volcano goes off .... like they always do.... thats natural... right .... a part of the ecology of an area? no i dont think so.
You do realise we are coming out of an ice age like 5 min ago (geologically speaking) Temps rise first then the carbon rises thats what gores chart showed and the ice cores show.. Whats next??? no more hot showers because water vapor is a much more potent greenhouse gas then carbon can ever be.
NO VOODOO!!!!! Nothing is without a cause - this is the basis of western science.
If you assume we are warming for natural causes you have to GIVE PRECISELY THE REASONS WITH MEASUREMENTS !!! Otherwise remain silent as you would only pollute the debate with "opinions" not backed by any facts (that would be a strong increase of total solar irradiation or a "sudden" tipping of earth's axis).
Btw: that A causes B is no proof B cannot cause A - your logic fails.
They like money as much as anyone else, but they disguise the fact by calling it "social and economic justice." But they keep their "justice" for themselves.
I know a better term for "eugenicists," "global elites" nazis and other genocidal collectivist morons of all stripes. You can find them all under fabian socialism if you search wikipedia.
What a scam. If CO2 really were a danger to the planet they wouldn't come up with these bizarre futile taxation/cap and trade schemes. They'd simply legislate it out of use. They would make it illegal to emit or use CO2. Period
@nigelelsass ok asshole 1st i got my information from a article i read and ur dumb as fuk if u really think pollution is da cause for global warming. if ur tryin 2 link me 2 David Rottenchild ur fukin stupid i never said mars, jupiter or saturn was closer 2 da sun then earth so stfu. wat i said was earth is orbiting closer 2 da sun. u can believe al gore's lies if u want, hes makin millions off of idiots like u. read the article at searchwarpxcom/swa315243.htm (replace x with .)
@urnigelelsass ok asshole 1st i got my information from a article i read and ur dumb as fuk if u really think pollution is da cause for global warming. if ur tryin 2 link me 2 David Rottenchild ur fukin stupid i never said mars, jupiter or saturn was closer 2 da sun then earth so stfu. wat i said was earth is orbiting closer 2 da sun. u can believe al gore's lies if u want, hes makin millions off of idiots like u. read the article at searchwarpxcom/swa315243.htm (replace x with .)
The Earth's orbit is closer to the Sun than at other times in the past. As a result the Earth is receiving as much as 30 percent more sunlight than it has in the past several hundred years. More sunlight means more heat, pollution has nothing 2 do with it
"(global warming is) some kind of tricky campaign made up by some commercial structures to promote their business projects."
Russian President Medvedev after July 31, 2010
"practically everything is burning. The weather is anomalously hot. What's happening with the planet's climate right now needs to be a wake-up call to all of us, ...in order to take a more energetic approach to countering the global changes to the climate."
@paolo27th Okay, try to breathe in a small chamber where nothing but CO2 is being pumped into the air in that chamber. What do you think would happen?
@jazzfan5000 I was being sarcastic. But by your example try to breathe in a small chamber where nothing but any one single gas (nitogen, helium, neon, oxygen...) is being pumped into the air and tell me what happens.
Temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period (roughly 800 to 1200 AD), which allowed the Vikings to settle presently inhospitable Greenland, were higher than even the worst-case scenario reported by the IPCC.
Ah once again its about the money, simply create a new scientific theory.. sell some books, make it a HBO classic and raise some tax. Like or not the public has to believe it and accept it as they're earthbound catastrophes. There's just no end to this. More coming..
I stopped listening when the video tried to claim that rotting leaves and animals produce lots of carbon dioxide and therefore human sources are just a tiny fraction. That's just emitting carbon dioxide that has already been taken out the atmosphere by plants. It doesn't compare to burning oil and releasing carbon dioxide that has been trapped underground for millions of years. Doesn't reflect well on the quality of the science in the program!
@WaldoXerxes how is it stupid? there are WAY more plants covering the earth than there are factories. and if doesn't reflect well, i think ppl would love to see your irrefutable data.
Google "carbon cycle." Plants take carbon dioxide from the air, producing carbon compounds that make their structure. When they die, these carbon compounds are broken down and produce carbon dioxide. Since the carbon originally came from the air, there is no overall change to carbon dioxide levels, as the plants are always being replaced by new ones which take it out the air. Obviously if all the plants in the world died and weren't replaced, carbon dioxide levels would increase
@WaldoXerxes very true. they co2 levels are replaced, but i think the point of the vid was that, regardless of the fact u previously stated ,plants DO give off more co2 levels then factories, and the the levels put off by factories are small in comparison to things such as volcanos and forest fires. and the main culprit for global warming is solar activity.
@WaldoXerxes the point is that Al Gore makes it seem as if it'll happen within our lifetime, or even within 100 years. human polution is a factor but a small factor. it's like the ocean. the ocean used to be nothing but fresh water but took BILLIONS of years to gain the salt level it has today, from rivers dumping salt into the ocean slowly over time.
so yeah we should strive for cleaner fuels. but it's obvious with these rediculous tax proposals that he has a seperate agenda.
I'm not for or against Al Gore, I am from the UK so don't know much about his politics. However I see no reason to disbelieve the scientific consensus that CO2 causes warming. The point made in the video about the time lag is looking at CO2 wrong - what happens is a small change in temperature causes an increase in CO2 concentration, which causes warming, which causes more CO2. This explains why there is a time lag. Something other than CO2 is the trigger however.
Yes, humans are not the only sources of carbon dioxide, but the other sources are simply recycling the already existing carbon, consuming it as fast as they produce it (with the exception of volcanoes). But humans burn coal which contains CO2 that has been sequestered underground for millions of years, adding more CO2 to the cycle and increasing the net amount of free carbon.
Ok you had me going until the talks of the Eugenics movement. I'm a global warming denier, but I'm not a tin foil hatter. A lot of these 'truth' movement people are guilty of the very same disinformation and misinformation that they say governments are.
@MicroMistery dont let the number fool you. lots of things are measured by the billions. your heart beat, number of suns in the galaxy, coding of your DNA...all that is very tiny when put on a scale. If you start the sentence with "i dont know", do research. what make global warming so (not obvious at first) a scam is that it involves money, not truly problem solving.
you want to know the truth about everything watch this video its 51 parts here is part1 /watch?v=le_ySMrOkFU then you continue with the other parts plz share this on the web let the whole world know
@Seraku15 Im sorry to hear that. TEaching my students to question will be part of my mission then. Questioning is fine, but try to not to generalize quickly huh! ^^
In what did I generalize, because I went back to my comment, and I did not generalize anything. It doesn't matter anyway, the school system is designed to dumb down society, destroy critical thought/thinking, etc.
@Seraku15 You seem to generalize that all teachers are the same. I went to school too, and I have a different impression about it. Such that I has always been a critical thinking person. But you are not alone. When I become a teacher, I'll keep this in mind.
How can you teach someone else when you are in fact confused? I never generalized any group of persons or things. I stated that "my" 7th grade teacher made me watch the GW film, and she did or I would have failed. Then I stated "Fuck them teachers" as referring to teachers/school curriculum who force students to learn false doctrines.
Please do research on the school system, maybe then you will change your mind on becoming a teacher.
@Seraku15 Fine. So "fuck them teachers" isn't a generalized statement. My bad for taking it literally then. I should have realized you mean the ones you had. That's why I feel sorry. Mine actually opened up my mind a lot and did what they could in the area of critical thinking. If the system is flawed, it's not a reason to abandon it. We are all flawed. I made peace with it. I like what I do, not the system. Thank you very much.
"Fuck them Teachers" ISN'T a generalised statement. I don't know where you get that from, I never stated that "All" of a certain group or persons act or behave in a certain way. If I did, then that'd be generalising. I really want to know how the School System acts a a service to students. I believe that we are taught to learn useless information that will be forgotten months later, bow down to so-called authority figures, conform, to not think critically, etc.
It's true that a lot of information taught in school appear to be useless. But do you realize even if you forget them, it helps the development of your brain. Have you studied neuroscience and psychology? Anything you learn adds to your cognitive ability, hence your critical thinking skill, which is what you been talking about. School is a convenience place to develop your mental capacity. If one doesnt take advantage of that, then school is indeed useless. I rest my case!
Co2 is heavier than oxygen and nitrogen so they cannot mix together. Just as one would see gasoline vapors they sink to the ground because they are heavier. This global warming is a bunch of bullshit.
FFS! Get with the program guys anyone can see that this is dodgy science. I suggest that you have another look at the research (from scientific journals not blogs, wikipedia etc). When you have proper evidence put up another video. Sunspots pffft
People with no scientific knowledge seem to be experts and have the audacity to tell people we are "destroying the earth" and by that if they mean systematically destroying rainforests and polluting oceans then yes, but i draw the line at som retard telling me we are artifically warming the earth, what a load of shit, this is just like 9/11 people tell you what to believe and you swallow it mindlessley one word BULL
Might i state that if your theorie about climate change is true the 12 year cycle should show similar levels of climate change over the years. but we have had record highs for the past ten years beyond the past 100 years before. that cant be explained.
Wrong on all counts. 1C rise would melt the icecaps eventually it would just take longer.
The predicted rise is 2-4C inthe next 90 years but this is considered a conservative estimate by many.
That 2-4C rise is in global temperature; the land temperatures will rise by about twice that and the polar regions by twice the land. (close to the9.5C even if you start with 2C for the rise).
Even with a10C rise it would take 100s years for the polar caps to melt if not miilenia.
I know I wont convince the diehards and loonies but I do not like to leave scientific nonsense out there on subjects liek global warming and evolution unchallenged because it may convince others.
@drkstrong: a rise in one degree wouldnt do shit! im in university for geography and your not fooling anyone by saying that. right now galciers are melting and growing all around the world. and so what if the glaciers melt? they have been melting for 100's of years, we are just comming out of a mini iceage and this happens. why do you think we find old human ruins underwater?
"The oceans contain 37,400 billion tons (GT) of suspended carbon, land biomass has 2000-3000 GT. The atmosphere contains 720 billion tons of CO2 and humans contribute only 6 GT. The oceans, land and atmosphere exchange CO2 continuously so the additional load by humans is incredibly small. A small shift in the balance between oceans and air would cause a much more severe rise than anything we could produce." (Jeff Id)
First you are comparing reservoir capacity for land, seas, and air with annual contribution from humans.
At 6GT per year for a decade you have increased the atmospheric concentration by about 5% (not all of it stays in the air). So to get to 35% increase (the currrent level of increase) you need just 70 years.
Volcanoes produce <1% of human emissions of CO2 annually.
Google "CO2 emitted by volcanoes" and choose the USGS page and it says:
"Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes".
Second problem is that they claim that the oceans are the biggest source of CO2, which is technically true, but they don't mention is that they are the biggest sink as well absorbing slightly more CO2 than they emit.
I hate it when someone tries to fool me, dont you?
According to the EPA and USGS and any other credible source of CO2 data, humans emit 30 Billion tonnes of CO2 per year.
According to the USGS volcanoes emti only 150-250 Million tonnes.
I'll let you do the division.
Don't you just hate when you try to make up "facts" to make a political point and somebody checks you on them and they are wrong so it shows how little you actually know. Embarrassing!
Generation Investment Management's founding partners are studded with officials from Goldman Sachs. They include David Blood, former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management (GSAM); Mark Ferguson, former co-head of GSAM pan-European research; and Peter Harris, who headed GSAM international operations
(Plus former Secretary of the Treasury (under George W Bush) & a former CEO of Goldman Sachs Hank Paulson has ties also to Gore & GIM
Al Gore & Corporate friends set to make billions off of the Global Warming Scam
Al Gore is chairman and founder of a private equity firm called Generation Investment Management (GIM). According to Gore, the London-based firm invests money from institutions and wealthy investors in companies that are going green. Generation Investment Management, purchases -- but isnt a provider of -- carbon dioxide offsets
Your video is a hoax backed by other hoaxes. Durkin's GGWS is a grand hoax. He got his volcano CO2 figures from Ian Plimer. The USGS has put this to rest a long time ago. Anthropogenic CO2 is 130X volcanic CO2.
Oh, and the sun, It's been a total unfluctuating light bulb for over 30 years.
I sure wish that we actually had the means to measure climate on other planets like we do earth. Other planets have so many differences that there is no relation to earth's climate.
You were supposed to say 12 years. 1998 was the super el nino year. You are cherry picking your data points. Even with that you are wrong. 2005 was a warmer year than 1998.
Look up the GISS Land Ocean Termperature graphs you get an entirely different view than yours.
Climate is considered the data of a minimum of 30 years by climate scientists. Let me guess, you aren't a professor of climatology, physics, oceanography or anything else.
The GISS Land surface and Ocean surface Temp. graphs are just of the SURFACE. UHI is a problem with land surfaces. The Greenhouse Effect is NOT UHI. It is the temp. of the ATMOSPHERE which has been cooling for 12 years, not warming.
No! The urban heat island has been decrocked. Watts raised a big hoopla over nothing on UHI.
Dr. J.K. Angell has data at the CDIAC site It shows the lower stratosphere is cooling but, the troposphere is warming up.
So, yes. You are sort of, kind of partially right. The part of the atmosphere predicted by climatologists to be cooling is cooling. You are wrong about the troposphere that is and was predicted to warm.
You say " decrocked ". Ok i'll bite. By who ?? Can you send links ? ( if you get this message twice , it's You tube's falt-----been having problems sending all nite).
@uboat21 NOAA and its NCDC were aware of "UHI" before you were. Climatologists have been using weather data from ground stations because they were already there. The same is true with weather satellites. It's the change over time that matters to climatologists. The data has a completely different use for meteorologists.
The Greenman3610 channel has an excellent explanation of this, "Watts Up With Watts?".
Yes, they do BUT they do not explain how it is removed from the Data. Most Meteorologists say it never has been properly dealt with . NOAA " says " it's removed, but no foot notes are given or methodology stated. Kind of strange for a " scientific " institution.
@uboat 21 Go get your explanation from "most meteorologists", whatever that may mean.
If you took out all the data from weather stations accused of being affected by "UHI", the global temperature trend charts won't change.
So then, what's your point? There are weather stations in Antarctica that are nuclear powered. Their data seems to keep reporting just fine even though it's irradiated.
Your "UHI" is pond skim. Hundreds of different data sets are included daily. Contact NOAA for more.
@uboat21 Pete Sinclair does a better than average job of providing the sources for his presentations. You still don't comprehend how data is used by climatologists compared to meteorologists.
@uboat21 Not Spencer. He believes that Earth has some sort of magical thermostat. It doesn't Spencer also has questionable ties with the Exxon funded Heartland Institute.
Spencer should have stuck with satellite temperature science. He is totally unaware that other satellites are recording the effects of climate change. Take GRACE for example. I'm sure you know all about GRACE.
@uboat21 The real problem is the water 99.999% of the mass on the planet. The Co2 in the water raises acidity ,that is the elephant in the room. The collapsing ocean life coral reefs and fish reproduction, complicated by fisheries over fishing will result in an undesirable result. we already have methane hydrate bubbling up. this is the 1-2 punch that we know realize explain the Permian extinction of 99% of life though it took two components spread over time...time which we do not have.
While this entire video is misinformation, 4:10 is complete garbage. The ocean is the biggest REMOVER of CO2 from the atmosphere. This is why marine ph levels have increased, as observed by mollusks and crustaceans being unable to properly form their carapaces.
On top of this, the greatest mass extinction of all time occured during the permian period when carbondioxide levels sharply increased from volcanic activity, resulting in the destruction of 95% of all life on earth.
@mxish 1hemidemisemi got it right with a bad choice of word. The ocean does take up about 1/3 of anthropogenic CO2. That's why atmospheric CO2 is increasing at 2ppm per year. That's the good news.
Bad news: The rate of absorption of CO2 by the ocean is now decreasing, plus what 1hemidemisemi said about ph.
More absorption and or a temperature increase of the ocean will decrease the rate even further, til it stops.
Because the term "global warming" is not strictly correct. Certain areas around the world are warming, but others are cooling. Britain is cooling because the thermohaline current that delivers warm air to western Europe is being slowed by the effects of climate change.
Things like global warming & terrorist attacks are made up to enforce strict policies so it can be easier to not only control our nation but the whole world.. Its been done before, its happening now & if it continues we will be slaves. Grow some balls & brains ppl!!
Yet not looking for solutions of the real efforts behind the global agenda of Co2 carbon admitting tax on the world. If you believe that Co2 is a threat then there is better solutions of fixing the problem than more taxation and bigger government. Just think of the out come of it all. Energy would sky rocket, meat, food, any thing that produces Co2 gasses would increase in revenue. Better technologies are the solution, not global dictatorship. After all this is what they are using it for.
The cause of global warming, is more government control. And big profits going in there pockets. It really is sad how people trust everything the government assholes tell them.
Humans, no matter what, cannot change the weather of the earth. It's impossible, we have NO control. The amount of CO2 we let out into the air is 0.002-0.004% of the amount that is let out from humans, the ocean, etc.
If you believer air is going to run out your stupid. we breath out CO2 your retard. God. created us. we are humans. not animals. This Scam is real. you are the one in denial. We have the facts. You have nothing to argue with. We will come together to prevent this bullshit. This is all about big powering government.
This doesn't even make sense. What has breathing out CO2 have to do with the fact that humans dug up and burned piles of fossil fuels, returning millions of tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere and unbalancing it, so that the earth is heating, causing a variety of changes to our complex climate?
Don't bother answering if you're just going to say some illiterate sentence about God or something.
@next thought. Glad you mentioned past warming, like in the Jurassic period. There was more CO2 back then, and of course a higher temperature. That's actually historical evidence showing that there is climate-sensitivity and positive feedback from CO2. It helps demonstrate that humans can affect the climate today - which we're doing.
So you understand that there numerous sources on the earth for CO2 emissions. The number 1 source is the ocean others that produce far more than we do are plants in decay and volcanoes. We are actually way down the list as CO2 producers. Plus CO2 does ot compare to methane as a greenhouse gas we should probably pave over swamps and kill all the cows... you know whatever it takes. Along with deindustrailization carbon taxes making Gore our King and concentrating wealth in the hands of the few.
@nextthought - Of course there are plenty of sources of CO2. But it's about balance. The ocean emits a lot of CO2 but also absorbs a lot of CO2. The problem is that it is the human additions that are tipping the balance so that the planet warms and causes various negative effects. That's the key, not the proportions. Methane is a potent GHG too, but has a different life cycle. One of the mitigating factors is that at least it disappears from the atmosphere a lot quicker than CO2.
Gewsh you may not be aware of the massive increase i plant life on the planet...There are a third more trees in europe now since WWII... This is partly true do to the petro we now burn; instead of trees... In the USA the volume of tree have increased dramatically from 40 per acre to 200 this is mainly due to fire fighting practices but it has created new problems so much fuel the fire get so hot they damage the soil. CO2 is our friend it is only about 1/2% of the atmosphere.
@nextthought - CO2 can be our friend, but too much of it causes GW which has serious impacts on agriculture, health and environment. CO2 has increased about 25% since 1800. The % of CO2 as a proportion of the atmosphere isn't important here. Nor is reforestation of Europe post-WWII. That short-term, localised planting just means nothing within the big picture. These little bits and pieces of information you throw around mean nothing in the context of the real GW science I'm afraid.
Gewsh youre polite and somewhat relevant but your homework is incomplete. We know global was about 2c higher during the medieval warming period 2c colder a few hundred years known as the little ice age. In 1888 when Krakatau erupted world temperature drop by 2c even with a huge amount of carbon expelled. The Sun controls our climate it always has. The only thing we will get is new taxes criminal carbon credits if this goes forward
Actually nthought, the Medieval warm period you're talking about only had warmness in certain regions, and other regions showed strong cooling. Globally, the temperatures then were cooler than today. It's also not the sun. There's been no trend in solar activity in the last 60 years. And the Krakatoa issue is about aerosols (dust/ash) which reflect heat and cool the temp. Just to clarify, are you really saying that increased CO2 does not warm the planet? Because that fact is well understood.
Your vid is a favorite on Solomon Islands
jesscarey411 4 days ago
Heres a theory,With each revolution around our sun we are getting closer to our sun.you know those round bowls you drop pennys down and they go round and round getting closer and closer and closer to the center and speed up as they get there.BUT could be the opposite (expanding) accompanied by increased solar activity. If you look at venus it looks like a young pre-earth if you look at mars it looks like a dead old-earth.
However i lean more towards implosion because satellites eventually fall
fawkUtube 5 months ago
@fawkUtube - we are currently moving away from the sun and towards sirius - venus was originally an ice comet, and is therefore not like the other planets. mars has been stripped of the atmosphere it once had. it was once populated on eh surface, now it is just populated inside , as all planets are..
see stewart swerdlow - hollow earth video..
SovereignBeing 3 months ago
@SovereignBeing meh i just found out October 1st a comet hit the sun thats why its been so hot just now cooling off i dont believe in hollow earth other than d.u.m.b.s eaverytthing has cycles thats what life is all about
fawkUtube 3 months ago
i pour a quart of oil down the sink when i get up in the morning. I set a few tires on fire and turn everything on in the house and that's before breakfast.And i make sure everything i eat for breakfast came from at least 4000 miles away.
I find it funny that the Prius has a digital plant icon in the dash that grows the the more efficient you drive i thought it was funny because plants need CO2 maybe plants should have a gauge for humans less oxygen is good?
fawkUtube 5 months ago
Comment removed
fawkUtube 5 months ago
Too shallow; outdated; doesn't reveal true facts of mmgw. The plan is not to ban CO2 - yes its needed by plants - idiot position - we just have too much CO2. IS IT THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND? Or the agenda here is to mislead & warp the facts?
dmlt12 5 months ago
FYI, Norway mass murderer Anders Breivik spouted this same mindless conspiracy theory in his manifesto. Too self-absorbed and scientifically ignorant to deal with the basic physics of CO2 in the atmosphere. Everything has to be a big damned conspiracy against the "rights" of right-wing douches to pollute and pillage however they please.
Antithropocentric 5 months ago
Al Gore made 100 million from his movie and flies all over the earth
jiminiflix 5 months ago 2
US, can you please stop polluting the air, water and soil, clean up and say sorry to the earth?
bvssvni 6 months ago
...The Sun...
BinaryBunyip 7 months ago
Yes CO2 is very beneficial to life. So is DUNG. Plants love the stuff. So by denialist logic, dung can't be pollution.
I guess then denialists won't mind having a wadd of dung in their morning cereal, or a steady stream of the life promoting dung in their drinking water.
CO2 is a metabolic waste product. That is why your body is constantly excreting it into the surrounding air.
If it didn't, you would die within a couple of minutes.
Pretty dramatic effect for a trace gas, wouldn't you say?
AtomSmash3r 7 months ago
@AtomSmash3r Carbon dioxide is colourless, odourless, tasteless, therefore comparing it to dung is completely misleading. But since you want to show what it means using cereal as an analogy CO2 is like adding a tiny bit more of a tiny section of the cereal, even though it won't change anything just make it better for you.
LMacleodovich 6 months ago
@LMacleodovich Sorry but comparing CO2 to dung is completely appropriate since they are both metabolic waste products excreted from the body. CO2 is poisonous, which is why your body goes to great lengths to expell it from your bodily tissues.
AtomSmash3r 6 months ago
@AtomSmash3r What?? CO2 is a natural beneficial gas and the reason for all the concern is that somehow adding 3% more to a gas that only makes up 0.038% of the atmosphere is going to cause harmful temperature changes. It is not poisonous because the amount which is being put in the atmosphere is not harmful to any living thing, which is why it cannot be a pollutant. It has nothing to do with how CO2 is an excretement.
LMacleodovich 6 months ago
@LMacleodovich CO2 is a natural beneficial gas. It is also toxic. Try holding your breath for 3 to 4 minutes and tell how if feels as that beneficial CO2 gas builds up in your blood stream.
AtomSmash3r 6 months ago
Sorry but plants and animals find high levels of CO2 toxic. This includes the human animal. CO2 makes bodies of water acidic, killing sea, lake, and river life. CO2 traps infrared and warms the earth. Currently, it is about 2 Watts for every square meter of Earth's surface.
That is why CO2 deposited into the atmosphere by man is pollution.
AtomSmash3r 6 months ago
@LMacleodovich Due to mans CO2 pollution. Rapid changes in global climate are anticipated to - and already obesrved to be causing extinction pressure on the Biosphere. Habitat loss, is the primary reason for extinction, and estimates of species loss due to projected warming exceed 40%.
Pretty dramatic affect for a trace gas wouldn't you say?
AtomSmash3r 6 months ago
@AtomSmash3r ive been readong up on both sides of the story and tbh there seems to be a lag time where temperature effects Co2 levels (not the other way around as Al gore said).... using models calculated ONLY from our last "mini-iceage" is misleading. Go back thousands of years and the data supports that what is occurring now is a completely natural state and damn you aussie government praying on ill-informed paranoia
hoonz97 6 months ago
@hoonz97 The only LAG is in your understanding on basic climate science.
The driving factor in the earths climate for the last million years has been changes in the earth's orbital and rotational parameters. CO2 has been a feedback to that effect hence CO2 lagging temperature historically. HOWEVER - CO2 is in the driver seat NOW because it is being artificially boosted through the burning of carbon based fuels.
CO2 can either lead or lag temeprature depending on what is doing the driving.
AtomSmash3r 6 months ago
@hoonz97 No, the data supports that what is occuring now is NOT natural.
Attribution studies have shown that a 0.5'C rise in temperature that is not sustained is within the statistical noise of the climate. However the change is now 0.75'C and the rise has been sustained for the decades, illustrating that the change is not a statistical fluke or within natural variation.
I'm sorry but you are wrong on all counts.
AtomSmash3r 6 months ago
@LMacleodovich You are also wrong about CO2 being colourless since it absorbs colours of light in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum. That region is merely invisible to the human eye.
AtomSmash3r 6 months ago
@AtomSmash3r Carbon dioxide is officially colourless, that is a fact, the statement however that carbon dioxide is a pollutant is false. Carbon dioxide is beneficial to plants, 97% of it is produced by nature and it is a harmless compound. If we truly wanted to make the planet greener, we will continue this production of carbon dioxide as there is no evidence to link it to harmful warming, but substantial evidence to link it to benefits to wildlife.
LMacleodovich 6 months ago
@LMacleodovich CO2 has colour, that is a scientific fact. Just because the human eye can't see something does not mean it is not there.
Yes CO2 is beneficial to plants, so is Shit and Piss. Are you going to argue that Shit and Piss cannot be pollution because it is beneficial to plants? Foolish.
CO2 is not harmless, it is toxic. Sure CO2 in small amounts is harmless, but so is Arsenic in small amounts, and also beneficial. Why not try to increase your bodies Arsenic content by .014%?
AtomSmash3r 6 months ago
The first video was pretty shocking...It's hard to believe how someone could write something so ridiculous. Slippery slope argument, straw man, argument from ignorance.
I think it's clear that somethings that we may need to survive can also be harmful to the planet.
MrTheodicy 7 months ago
one of the the best videos ever seen
LabcabinPhiladelphia 7 months ago
I love it when CO2 fanatics drink soda. Total irony.
whiteviking99 8 months ago
"some politicians want to label CO2 a pollutant" lol. It's just that the large majority of scientist and their findings urge politicians to make unpopular decisions. everyone knows CO2 is a natural gas, but as in any substance, the dose makes the difference. Ever tried eating 1kg of harmless salt? Fools.
TheAjumma 8 months ago
@TheAjumma True but you are forgetting that we produce 3% of the CO2 on the planet, and we definetely already don't have over 30 kg of salt in our bodies. A 50 kg person only has 200g of salt so it is like having 6 grams of salt and saying that it is disastrous to our bodies.
LMacleodovich 6 months ago
Im not sure whats worse... the religious right or the religious left : P
SyringeCycle 9 months ago
So, lets say global warning doesn't exist... Just take warming temperatures out of the equation all together. What would the benefits be of a world that didn't burn fossil fuels? Hmm, well we would be able to see Mount Ranier clearly from downtown Seattle, we could breath better, there would be far less maintenance on our cars if we all went electric, we wouldn't have to give a big chunk of money to oil producing countries just to have their people fly planes into our buildings...
wpederson1 10 months ago
@wpederson1 I totally agree. We shouldn't need a climate catastrophe, to realize that smog is bad! lol. This change will come about one heart at a time. We need to start asking questions like: Do I really need a car with a 5.6 liter engine?" Do I really need my house temp to be constanly at a cumfy 72 degrees? Do I need to go out on a joy ride? Can I plant a garden instead of a lawn? Do we really need this many buildings lit up all night?
rickyd0821 7 months ago
This sheep has awoke!
hot4ufcchick 11 months ago
Anthropogenic Global Warming is caused by human increases in fossil fuel CO2 PPM from 300 PPM for the last 800,000 years at least to the industrial revolution, to 390 PPM now.
qwertypoiu4321 11 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 Maybe in ur ass. Look outside retard.
Sugardaddy501 10 months ago
@Sugardaddy501 Beginning with the industrial revolution the average temperature has steadily become warmer and warmer, with the last decade being the warmest on record. That is just a fact.
qwertypoiu4321 10 months ago
There's still a lot of nutters out there claiming global warming is a hoax. Don't let them fool you, go to a source you can really trust. I trust what I read in encyclopedias, and they've been telling the same story about global warming for thirty years: humans are causing it, and it's very bad.
You can even look at wikipedia, but don't just trust the article, look at the discussion page where you can see all the paranoid fantasies being shot down one after another.
pvolt 11 months ago
@pvolt Clearly you aren't a university student as Wikipedia is a terrible reference...
nuggetsww 11 months ago
@nuggetsww I'm all in favour of raising the reference requirements for youtube comments... You start. Who says "Wikipedia is a terrible reference" ?
pvolt 11 months ago
@pvolt Again, you clearly don't go to university because the first thing they say is don't use Wikipedia as a reference BECAUSE anyone can edit them to put any fact they want in it...
nuggetsww 11 months ago
@nuggetsww False. The wikipedia page on Global Warming is locked. But if you believe you have a correction, look at the *discussion* page, where it may have already been addressed.
BTW, does your university have a policy on Glenn Beck?
pvolt 11 months ago
Comment removed
pvolt 11 months ago
@pvolt CO2 is not a pollutant you fool...it is what plants breath...it is what we produce naturally on this planet...the levels humans add is not even one eruption of Mount St. Helens over 100 years of all humanity on earth it would take to equal one volcanic eruption...sooo....do your research...we are NOT causing global warming...WE ARE however polluting in many other ways which need much more attention than the energy thing...that is a hoax to control people...plenty of power exists forever!
haolejohn 8 months ago 5
@haolejohn
Denialists often make your claim about volcanoes, but in fact the USGS’s own web site makes that accurate claim that in any given year, all of the worlds volcanoes produce less than 1% of the CO2 that man produces.
You really should try and find reliable sources of information, not CrackPot nonsense posted on denialist bloggs.
AtomSmash3r 7 months ago
I'm so glad to see that few people still believe this hoax!
Thank the Lord for whoever made the commercial and this video!
The answer to the few remaining "true believers when they ask what would someone gain by spreading the hoax?
ANSWER: All of your freedoms, most of your money, the economies of the world.
Al Gore has already made $100 million to a billion dollars from this scam.
Follow the money! Don't believe the hype!!!
co2isgoodal 11 months ago
@co2isgoodal : RIGHT, people study physics to get your money and deprive your from your freedom...
The idea that atmospheric scientists would be some shareholders in the solutions in the problem they research and present is RIDICULOUS.
nigelelsass 11 months ago
It's odd when you talk to liberal socialist eco-freaks their solution is always increasing taxes....
GreenChurchReject 1 year ago 25
@GreenChurchReject Damn! You're everywhere.
Not tired of your bitter parrot comments? No need to be a liberal socialist to understand that man-made global warming is a threat.
In addition, conservation and environmental stewardship are core of conservative values.
I suppose you are a "truther" who believes in nothing except paranoia ( inside job blah blah blah).
trentspirit1 1 year ago
@GreenChurchReject I am a libertarian Socialist and a skeptic of Global Warming.
23lFrench 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX TO IMPOSE A GLOBAL CARBON TAX THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED ON EVERY NECESSITY AND COMMODITY. IF A GLOBAL CARBON TAX IS PASSED 1 BILLION PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO DIE WITHIN ONE DECADE OF IT'S PASSING. THE GLOBAL ELITE, THE ENVIRONMENTALIST SPEWING THIS PROPAGANDA, IGNORE POLLUTION,DEFORESTATION, CHEMICAL DUMPING, AND RADIATION IN ORDER TO FOCUS ON THE REDUCING THE CHEMICAL THAT WE BREATH AND PLANTS NEED TO SURVIVE. THIS IS A LIE. EVIL EXIST AND IS PRESENT.
ganderson0625 1 year ago
The CO2 story in this video is rediculous. There is a cycle on earth wich produces a lot of CO2 and consumes a lot of oxygen but it is taken in again by plants. For every mol of CO2 that is emitted, on mol of CO2 has to be taken from the atmosphere first.
The point is that fossil fuels which have been in the earth for a long time are being burned and this introduces new CO2 to the atmosphere.
learn your ecology retards
frank8910 1 year ago
@frank8910 So tell us retards how you know where the balance is? The earth does a great job in maintaining a balance. Even the earth can't keep a perfect balance. What is considered too much or too few? Why do people like you get to decide what is too much anyway? Were you around billions of years ago? Did you create the earth? The answer is no on all counts. You don't know more or less than any of the retards you think your talking to. You are just as ignorant as the rest of us.
feelzthelove 1 year ago
IF the earth is doing a great job at maintaining a balance, why are we plagged by more weather extremes than before and why are gobal average temperature increase fast (doesn't seem like a balance to me or any statistitian).
nigelelsass 11 months ago
@frank8910 and when a volcano goes off .... like they always do.... thats natural... right .... a part of the ecology of an area? no i dont think so.
You do realise we are coming out of an ice age like 5 min ago (geologically speaking) Temps rise first then the carbon rises thats what gores chart showed and the ice cores show.. Whats next??? no more hot showers because water vapor is a much more potent greenhouse gas then carbon can ever be.
Please
ORACLE063 1 year ago
@ORACLE063 :
NO VOODOO!!!!! Nothing is without a cause - this is the basis of western science.
If you assume we are warming for natural causes you have to GIVE PRECISELY THE REASONS WITH MEASUREMENTS !!! Otherwise remain silent as you would only pollute the debate with "opinions" not backed by any facts (that would be a strong increase of total solar irradiation or a "sudden" tipping of earth's axis).
Btw: that A causes B is no proof B cannot cause A - your logic fails.
nigelelsass 11 months ago
They like money as much as anyone else, but they disguise the fact by calling it "social and economic justice." But they keep their "justice" for themselves.
sirius1188k 1 year ago
and bums, and crooks.
sirius1188k 1 year ago
They usually call themselves progressives. I call them shitheads.
sirius1188k 1 year ago
I know a better term for "eugenicists," "global elites" nazis and other genocidal collectivist morons of all stripes. You can find them all under fabian socialism if you search wikipedia.
sirius1188k 1 year ago
What a scam. If CO2 really were a danger to the planet they wouldn't come up with these bizarre futile taxation/cap and trade schemes. They'd simply legislate it out of use. They would make it illegal to emit or use CO2. Period
rfalfonse 1 year ago
@nigelelsass ok asshole 1st i got my information from a article i read and ur dumb as fuk if u really think pollution is da cause for global warming. if ur tryin 2 link me 2 David Rottenchild ur fukin stupid i never said mars, jupiter or saturn was closer 2 da sun then earth so stfu. wat i said was earth is orbiting closer 2 da sun. u can believe al gore's lies if u want, hes makin millions off of idiots like u. read the article at searchwarpxcom/swa315243.htm (replace x with .)
51oEastBay 1 year ago
@urnigelelsass ok asshole 1st i got my information from a article i read and ur dumb as fuk if u really think pollution is da cause for global warming. if ur tryin 2 link me 2 David Rottenchild ur fukin stupid i never said mars, jupiter or saturn was closer 2 da sun then earth so stfu. wat i said was earth is orbiting closer 2 da sun. u can believe al gore's lies if u want, hes makin millions off of idiots like u. read the article at searchwarpxcom/swa315243.htm (replace x with .)
51oEastBay 1 year ago
@51oEastBay :
I am highly amuse by our Anglo-Saxon "friends" settling a scientific question based on two non-scientists discussing the matter.
The day you need a surgical operation, do you want the vital decision be based on my grandma talking with the mailman?
nigelelsass 11 months ago
The poor guy can't even spell temperature units correctly (Fahrenheit NOT "ferinheight) let alone discuss it HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
RB1US 1 year ago
YAY SAVE THE FUCKING TREES, SAVE THE BEES, SAVE THE WHALES, SAVE THOSE FUCKIN SNAILS!!""
NebunLaCap 1 year ago
I thought the sun was like a million degrees wtf
NebunLaCap 1 year ago
Fuck Al Whore!
usergently 1 year ago
i dont understand teh solar cycle theory..
that cycle repeats every 11 years... and global warming has been detected long before 11 years ago..
so how does that explain the warming before 1999?
vids016 1 year ago
The Earth's orbit is closer to the Sun than at other times in the past. As a result the Earth is receiving as much as 30 percent more sunlight than it has in the past several hundred years. More sunlight means more heat, pollution has nothing 2 do with it
51oEastBay 1 year ago
@51oEastBay : I like people who are PAID TO POST LIES LIKE YOU NOT BACKED BY ANY FACTS...
It just goes to show who is desperate to spread their lies.
Ok when you're back with sources for your increase in solar input (which is never ever ), then post again, ok?
nigelelsass 1 year ago
Alex Jones 2 David Rottenchild.
AJ "explain how SUVs are responsible for the poles of Mars melting along with the moons of Jupiter and Saturn"
Rothschild: "because those planets are closer to the sun, my friend"
What!?
Firstly. How could anyone take seriously moron Rothschild when he's placing Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn closer to the sun than earth? What a tool.
2nd, and MORE importantly. If they WERE closer to the sun then what exactly is Rottenchild saying? lolz-a-plenty.
71eleven 1 year ago 17
Comment removed
71eleven 1 year ago
Comment removed
71eleven 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Russian President Medvedev 2009
"(global warming is) some kind of tricky campaign made up by some commercial structures to promote their business projects."
Russian President Medvedev after July 31, 2010
"practically everything is burning. The weather is anomalously hot. What's happening with the planet's climate right now needs to be a wake-up call to all of us, ...in order to take a more energetic approach to countering the global changes to the climate."
egeefay 1 year ago
Yes, you see, CO2 is a good thing lol.
paolo27th 1 year ago
@paolo27th Okay, try to breathe in a small chamber where nothing but CO2 is being pumped into the air in that chamber. What do you think would happen?
jazzfan5000 1 year ago
@jazzfan5000 I was being sarcastic. But by your example try to breathe in a small chamber where nothing but any one single gas (nitogen, helium, neon, oxygen...) is being pumped into the air and tell me what happens.
paolo27th 1 year ago
Failed presidential candidate goes on snake oil circuit . Makes millions
This is the same heehaw jackass who put offensive lyric lables on music records .
peterm3964 1 year ago 3
thanks but I think I'll listen to the mainstream scientific consensus from UNEP
mickey4747801 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
FUCK ALL OF YOU!
AllCityVandal1 1 year ago
Temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period (roughly 800 to 1200 AD), which allowed the Vikings to settle presently inhospitable Greenland, were higher than even the worst-case scenario reported by the IPCC.
Chrisfre 1 year ago 3
I'm sure more taxes will fix it right up
greenalkalinerain 1 year ago 2
Ah once again its about the money, simply create a new scientific theory.. sell some books, make it a HBO classic and raise some tax. Like or not the public has to believe it and accept it as they're earthbound catastrophes. There's just no end to this. More coming..
neo440x 1 year ago
I stopped listening when the video tried to claim that rotting leaves and animals produce lots of carbon dioxide and therefore human sources are just a tiny fraction. That's just emitting carbon dioxide that has already been taken out the atmosphere by plants. It doesn't compare to burning oil and releasing carbon dioxide that has been trapped underground for millions of years. Doesn't reflect well on the quality of the science in the program!
WaldoXerxes 1 year ago
@WaldoXerxes how is it stupid? there are WAY more plants covering the earth than there are factories. and if doesn't reflect well, i think ppl would love to see your irrefutable data.
baezalejandro 1 year ago
@baezalejandro
Google "carbon cycle." Plants take carbon dioxide from the air, producing carbon compounds that make their structure. When they die, these carbon compounds are broken down and produce carbon dioxide. Since the carbon originally came from the air, there is no overall change to carbon dioxide levels, as the plants are always being replaced by new ones which take it out the air. Obviously if all the plants in the world died and weren't replaced, carbon dioxide levels would increase
WaldoXerxes 1 year ago
@WaldoXerxes very true. they co2 levels are replaced, but i think the point of the vid was that, regardless of the fact u previously stated ,plants DO give off more co2 levels then factories, and the the levels put off by factories are small in comparison to things such as volcanos and forest fires. and the main culprit for global warming is solar activity.
baezalejandro 1 year ago
@WaldoXerxes the point is that Al Gore makes it seem as if it'll happen within our lifetime, or even within 100 years. human polution is a factor but a small factor. it's like the ocean. the ocean used to be nothing but fresh water but took BILLIONS of years to gain the salt level it has today, from rivers dumping salt into the ocean slowly over time.
so yeah we should strive for cleaner fuels. but it's obvious with these rediculous tax proposals that he has a seperate agenda.
baezalejandro 1 year ago
@baezalejandro
I'm not for or against Al Gore, I am from the UK so don't know much about his politics. However I see no reason to disbelieve the scientific consensus that CO2 causes warming. The point made in the video about the time lag is looking at CO2 wrong - what happens is a small change in temperature causes an increase in CO2 concentration, which causes warming, which causes more CO2. This explains why there is a time lag. Something other than CO2 is the trigger however.
WaldoXerxes 1 year ago
Yes, humans are not the only sources of carbon dioxide, but the other sources are simply recycling the already existing carbon, consuming it as fast as they produce it (with the exception of volcanoes). But humans burn coal which contains CO2 that has been sequestered underground for millions of years, adding more CO2 to the cycle and increasing the net amount of free carbon.
1hemidemisemi 1 year ago
fuck you al gore. V8's and v12's for everyone
debel101 1 year ago
Ok you had me going until the talks of the Eugenics movement. I'm a global warming denier, but I'm not a tin foil hatter. A lot of these 'truth' movement people are guilty of the very same disinformation and misinformation that they say governments are.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
CLIMATE LINKED TO SMALLER BIRDS
By Matt Walker
Editor, Earth News
BBC NEWS Friday, 12 March 2010
Songbirds in the US are getting smaller, and climate change is suspected as the cause.
A study of almost half a million birds, belonging to over 100 species, shows that many are gradually becoming lighter and growing shorter wings.
Nightversionn 1 year ago
@Nightversionn
did u buy some of his shares? and ur scared of losing them? hahahahah
gunboundsuck 1 year ago
I don't know, I think 3.1 billion tonnes of Toxic Pollutants every single year from North America alone is pretty bad.
MicroMistery 1 year ago
@MicroMistery dont let the number fool you. lots of things are measured by the billions. your heart beat, number of suns in the galaxy, coding of your DNA...all that is very tiny when put on a scale. If you start the sentence with "i dont know", do research. what make global warming so (not obvious at first) a scam is that it involves money, not truly problem solving.
MugenTJ 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you want to know the truth about everything watch this video its 51 parts here is part1 /watch?v=le_ySMrOkFU then you continue with the other parts plz share this on the web let the whole world know
jerryngang 1 year ago
I can't believe 3 years ago, in 7th grade my teacher made me watch a documentary on global warming.
I was indoctrinated into believing in this bullshit, to this day I question everything and anything.
Fuck them Teachers, a few days ago "New World Order" was stated in a film on RFD.
Seraku15 1 year ago
@Seraku15 Im sorry to hear that. TEaching my students to question will be part of my mission then. Questioning is fine, but try to not to generalize quickly huh! ^^
MugenTJ 1 year ago
@MugenTJ
In what did I generalize, because I went back to my comment, and I did not generalize anything. It doesn't matter anyway, the school system is designed to dumb down society, destroy critical thought/thinking, etc.
Seraku15 1 year ago
@Seraku15 You seem to generalize that all teachers are the same. I went to school too, and I have a different impression about it. Such that I has always been a critical thinking person. But you are not alone. When I become a teacher, I'll keep this in mind.
MugenTJ 1 year ago
@MugenTJ
How can you teach someone else when you are in fact confused? I never generalized any group of persons or things. I stated that "my" 7th grade teacher made me watch the GW film, and she did or I would have failed. Then I stated "Fuck them teachers" as referring to teachers/school curriculum who force students to learn false doctrines.
Please do research on the school system, maybe then you will change your mind on becoming a teacher.
Seraku15 1 year ago
@Seraku15 Fine. So "fuck them teachers" isn't a generalized statement. My bad for taking it literally then. I should have realized you mean the ones you had. That's why I feel sorry. Mine actually opened up my mind a lot and did what they could in the area of critical thinking. If the system is flawed, it's not a reason to abandon it. We are all flawed. I made peace with it. I like what I do, not the system. Thank you very much.
MugenTJ 1 year ago
@MugenTJ
"Fuck them Teachers" ISN'T a generalised statement. I don't know where you get that from, I never stated that "All" of a certain group or persons act or behave in a certain way. If I did, then that'd be generalising. I really want to know how the School System acts a a service to students. I believe that we are taught to learn useless information that will be forgotten months later, bow down to so-called authority figures, conform, to not think critically, etc.
Seraku15 1 year ago
It's true that a lot of information taught in school appear to be useless. But do you realize even if you forget them, it helps the development of your brain. Have you studied neuroscience and psychology? Anything you learn adds to your cognitive ability, hence your critical thinking skill, which is what you been talking about. School is a convenience place to develop your mental capacity. If one doesnt take advantage of that, then school is indeed useless. I rest my case!
MugenTJ 1 year ago
Co2 is heavier than oxygen and nitrogen so they cannot mix together. Just as one would see gasoline vapors they sink to the ground because they are heavier. This global warming is a bunch of bullshit.
STORMLORD70 1 year ago
FFS! Get with the program guys anyone can see that this is dodgy science. I suggest that you have another look at the research (from scientific journals not blogs, wikipedia etc). When you have proper evidence put up another video. Sunspots pffft
aidy8 1 year ago
People with no scientific knowledge seem to be experts and have the audacity to tell people we are "destroying the earth" and by that if they mean systematically destroying rainforests and polluting oceans then yes, but i draw the line at som retard telling me we are artifically warming the earth, what a load of shit, this is just like 9/11 people tell you what to believe and you swallow it mindlessley one word BULL
DestroyIsreal2009 1 year ago
Might i state that if your theorie about climate change is true the 12 year cycle should show similar levels of climate change over the years. but we have had record highs for the past ten years beyond the past 100 years before. that cant be explained.
zanhe12 1 year ago
to melt all the icecaps it would take a rise of 9.5 degrees C. its projected to rise between 1-2 in the next 100 years.
sublimeisdope 1 year ago
Wrong on all counts. 1C rise would melt the icecaps eventually it would just take longer.
The predicted rise is 2-4C inthe next 90 years but this is considered a conservative estimate by many.
That 2-4C rise is in global temperature; the land temperatures will rise by about twice that and the polar regions by twice the land. (close to the9.5C even if you start with 2C for the rise).
Even with a10C rise it would take 100s years for the polar caps to melt if not miilenia.
drkstrong 1 year ago
@drkstrong you better not to even try convincing people i have given up.
ITHEREONETHATHASNT 1 year ago
I know I wont convince the diehards and loonies but I do not like to leave scientific nonsense out there on subjects liek global warming and evolution unchallenged because it may convince others.
drkstrong 1 year ago
@drkstrong: a rise in one degree wouldnt do shit! im in university for geography and your not fooling anyone by saying that. right now galciers are melting and growing all around the world. and so what if the glaciers melt? they have been melting for 100's of years, we are just comming out of a mini iceage and this happens. why do you think we find old human ruins underwater?
sublimeisdope 1 year ago
"The oceans contain 37,400 billion tons (GT) of suspended carbon, land biomass has 2000-3000 GT. The atmosphere contains 720 billion tons of CO2 and humans contribute only 6 GT. The oceans, land and atmosphere exchange CO2 continuously so the additional load by humans is incredibly small. A small shift in the balance between oceans and air would cause a much more severe rise than anything we could produce." (Jeff Id)
TiredofAGWbs 1 year ago
Apples and Oranges:
First you are comparing reservoir capacity for land, seas, and air with annual contribution from humans.
At 6GT per year for a decade you have increased the atmospheric concentration by about 5% (not all of it stays in the air). So to get to 35% increase (the currrent level of increase) you need just 70 years.
Its not linear but it gives a rough idea.
drkstrong 1 year ago
Global warming is not real and it never will be real!!!
But i listen to the scientists who disagree.
The companies only dissagree because it would shut down there companies
Whatever bitch made this obviously doesnt give a shit about any of us they just want money
TheFatFruit11 1 year ago
Who's the retard who said that todays weather disproves climate change?
LittleBigB 1 year ago
Fuck Al Gore! Fuck Global Warming Scam! Fuck The Bilderberg Group!
secretdekoi 2 years ago 25
@secretdekoi
you're dick
the Britons brought rabbits to Australia and look what it did to the environment.
Pollutions is bad. What don't you guys just except it. you remind me of ignorant creationists.
dennisrayso 1 year ago
@secretdekoi FUCK CONSPIRACISTS LIKE YOU!
quidproquo2004 1 year ago
Volcanoes produce <1% of human emissions of CO2 annually.
Google "CO2 emitted by volcanoes" and choose the USGS page and it says:
"Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes".
Second problem is that they claim that the oceans are the biggest source of CO2, which is technically true, but they don't mention is that they are the biggest sink as well absorbing slightly more CO2 than they emit.
I hate it when someone tries to fool me, dont you?
drkstrong 2 years ago
@drkstrongm, volcanoes pump 130 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.
So according to you, somehow, Humans are emmiting 16900 million tonnes of CO2 per year.
We should be ankle deep carbon.
I hate it when someone tries to troll me, dont you?
Or are you just medically retarded?
deadlizard64 1 year ago
According to the EPA and USGS and any other credible source of CO2 data, humans emit 30 Billion tonnes of CO2 per year.
According to the USGS volcanoes emti only 150-250 Million tonnes.
I'll let you do the division.
Don't you just hate when you try to make up "facts" to make a political point and somebody checks you on them and they are wrong so it shows how little you actually know. Embarrassing!
Appology accepted.
drkstrong 1 year ago
drkstrong - Google "CO2 emitted by volcanoes"
Google? lmfao, you own share in that shit or what.
Try some real research, you know get off your fat lazy ass and do some work or somthing.
yeah good luck to ya' an' all
deadlizard64 1 year ago
I did google "CO2 emitted by volcanoes" and the first article that came up was "Volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans—Not even close"
It says: "The fact of the matter is, the sum total of all CO2 out-gassed by active volcanoes amounts to about 1/150th of anthropogenic emissions."
Read the rest of it, learn something, and appologize!
drkstrong 1 year ago
Al Gore & Goldman Sachs
Generation Investment Management's founding partners are studded with officials from Goldman Sachs. They include David Blood, former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management (GSAM); Mark Ferguson, former co-head of GSAM pan-European research; and Peter Harris, who headed GSAM international operations
(Plus former Secretary of the Treasury (under George W Bush) & a former CEO of Goldman Sachs Hank Paulson has ties also to Gore & GIM
Pecora Commission now!
Thisawareness 2 years ago
Al Gore & Corporate friends set to make billions off of the Global Warming Scam
Al Gore is chairman and founder of a private equity firm called Generation Investment Management (GIM). According to Gore, the London-based firm invests money from institutions and wealthy investors in companies that are going green. Generation Investment Management, purchases -- but isnt a provider of -- carbon dioxide offsets
Thisawareness 2 years ago 13
Your video is a hoax backed by other hoaxes. Durkin's GGWS is a grand hoax. He got his volcano CO2 figures from Ian Plimer. The USGS has put this to rest a long time ago. Anthropogenic CO2 is 130X volcanic CO2.
Oh, and the sun, It's been a total unfluctuating light bulb for over 30 years.
I sure wish that we actually had the means to measure climate on other planets like we do earth. Other planets have so many differences that there is no relation to earth's climate.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago 3
Is that why the atmosphere has been COOLING for 10 years?
uboat21 2 years ago
You were supposed to say 12 years. 1998 was the super el nino year. You are cherry picking your data points. Even with that you are wrong. 2005 was a warmer year than 1998.
Look up the GISS Land Ocean Termperature graphs you get an entirely different view than yours.
Climate is considered the data of a minimum of 30 years by climate scientists. Let me guess, you aren't a professor of climatology, physics, oceanography or anything else.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
The GISS Land surface and Ocean surface Temp. graphs are just of the SURFACE. UHI is a problem with land surfaces. The Greenhouse Effect is NOT UHI. It is the temp. of the ATMOSPHERE which has been cooling for 12 years, not warming.
uboat21 2 years ago
No! The urban heat island has been decrocked. Watts raised a big hoopla over nothing on UHI.
Dr. J.K. Angell has data at the CDIAC site It shows the lower stratosphere is cooling but, the troposphere is warming up.
So, yes. You are sort of, kind of partially right. The part of the atmosphere predicted by climatologists to be cooling is cooling. You are wrong about the troposphere that is and was predicted to warm.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
You say " decrocked ". Ok i'll bite. By who ?? Can you send links ? ( if you get this message twice , it's You tube's falt-----been having problems sending all nite).
uboat21 2 years ago
@uboat21 NOAA and its NCDC were aware of "UHI" before you were. Climatologists have been using weather data from ground stations because they were already there. The same is true with weather satellites. It's the change over time that matters to climatologists. The data has a completely different use for meteorologists.
The Greenman3610 channel has an excellent explanation of this, "Watts Up With Watts?".
NOAA and NCDC have websites that explain "UHI".
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
Yes, they do BUT they do not explain how it is removed from the Data. Most Meteorologists say it never has been properly dealt with . NOAA " says " it's removed, but no foot notes are given or methodology stated. Kind of strange for a " scientific " institution.
uboat21 2 years ago
@uboat 21 Go get your explanation from "most meteorologists", whatever that may mean.
If you took out all the data from weather stations accused of being affected by "UHI", the global temperature trend charts won't change.
So then, what's your point? There are weather stations in Antarctica that are nuclear powered. Their data seems to keep reporting just fine even though it's irradiated.
Your "UHI" is pond skim. Hundreds of different data sets are included daily. Contact NOAA for more.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
You can " get rid of UHI " by using Data from Antartica . Google WHAT THE STATIONS SAY . Click the first link , then on the map of Antartica.
uboat21 1 year ago
It figures you would use greenman as your " proof " .
uboat21 1 year ago
@uboat21 Pete Sinclair does a better than average job of providing the sources for his presentations. You still don't comprehend how data is used by climatologists compared to meteorologists.
TRUMPHENT 1 year ago
DR.Spencer has EDcrocked your decrocking , and since he is on the trustworthy, all powerfull , IPCC , I guess you will believe him .
uboat21 1 year ago
@uboat21 Not Spencer. He believes that Earth has some sort of magical thermostat. It doesn't Spencer also has questionable ties with the Exxon funded Heartland Institute.
Spencer should have stuck with satellite temperature science. He is totally unaware that other satellites are recording the effects of climate change. Take GRACE for example. I'm sure you know all about GRACE.
TRUMPHENT 1 year ago
@uboat21 The real problem is the water 99.999% of the mass on the planet. The Co2 in the water raises acidity ,that is the elephant in the room. The collapsing ocean life coral reefs and fish reproduction, complicated by fisheries over fishing will result in an undesirable result. we already have methane hydrate bubbling up. this is the 1-2 punch that we know realize explain the Permian extinction of 99% of life though it took two components spread over time...time which we do not have.
williamghaynes 2 years ago
SO, it looks like CO2, is not the GREAT and POWERFULL DEATH gas , we have been told .
uboat21 1 year ago
While this entire video is misinformation, 4:10 is complete garbage. The ocean is the biggest REMOVER of CO2 from the atmosphere. This is why marine ph levels have increased, as observed by mollusks and crustaceans being unable to properly form their carapaces.
On top of this, the greatest mass extinction of all time occured during the permian period when carbondioxide levels sharply increased from volcanic activity, resulting in the destruction of 95% of all life on earth.
1hemidemisemi 2 years ago
remover of co2?!?!?! jesus christ this is hardly worth replying to. you sir are a complete moron
mxish 2 years ago
@mxish 1hemidemisemi got it right with a bad choice of word. The ocean does take up about 1/3 of anthropogenic CO2. That's why atmospheric CO2 is increasing at 2ppm per year. That's the good news.
Bad news: The rate of absorption of CO2 by the ocean is now decreasing, plus what 1hemidemisemi said about ph.
More absorption and or a temperature increase of the ocean will decrease the rate even further, til it stops.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
@mxish
In the presence of water, CO2 dissolves and becomes carbonic acid. Learn chemistry.
1hemidemisemi 1 year ago
if it was global warming then why is it in britain the coldest winter for the past 30 years.
idontsignin 2 years ago
Because the term "global warming" is not strictly correct. Certain areas around the world are warming, but others are cooling. Britain is cooling because the thermohaline current that delivers warm air to western Europe is being slowed by the effects of climate change.
1hemidemisemi 2 years ago
i have never heard so much crap in all my life.
idontsignin 2 years ago
Google PDO GLOBAL WARMING . You might learn something.
uboat21 2 years ago
Things like global warming & terrorist attacks are made up to enforce strict policies so it can be easier to not only control our nation but the whole world.. Its been done before, its happening now & if it continues we will be slaves. Grow some balls & brains ppl!!
TrueGreatness73 2 years ago 4
It's a same BS as the ozone layer few years ego. That's fixed now.
garagecrap 2 years ago
You forgot, Y2K...the new Ice Age (the late 1970s) DDT... " were going to run out of oil" (Carter).............
uboat21 2 years ago
Outstanding. This video should be showed in schools instead of algore's 'convient lie'.
mahammadabba 2 years ago
Yet not looking for solutions of the real efforts behind the global agenda of Co2 carbon admitting tax on the world. If you believe that Co2 is a threat then there is better solutions of fixing the problem than more taxation and bigger government. Just think of the out come of it all. Energy would sky rocket, meat, food, any thing that produces Co2 gasses would increase in revenue. Better technologies are the solution, not global dictatorship. After all this is what they are using it for.
TheMaximumoverload 2 years ago 4
The cause of global warming, is more government control. And big profits going in there pockets. It really is sad how people trust everything the government assholes tell them.
Master7770 2 years ago 2
Humans, no matter what, cannot change the weather of the earth. It's impossible, we have NO control. The amount of CO2 we let out into the air is 0.002-0.004% of the amount that is let out from humans, the ocean, etc.
LPMagic341 2 years ago
I'm done being brain washed by people like Al Gore. People like him make me sick just looking at them....
TheMaximumoverload 2 years ago
If you believer air is going to run out your stupid. we breath out CO2 your retard. God. created us. we are humans. not animals. This Scam is real. you are the one in denial. We have the facts. You have nothing to argue with. We will come together to prevent this bullshit. This is all about big powering government.
candiann09 2 years ago
This doesn't even make sense. What has breathing out CO2 have to do with the fact that humans dug up and burned piles of fossil fuels, returning millions of tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere and unbalancing it, so that the earth is heating, causing a variety of changes to our complex climate?
Don't bother answering if you're just going to say some illiterate sentence about God or something.
gewsh 2 years ago
Think harder what you say makes little sense... CO2 is a benifit for plants we had much more in the atmosphere during the time of the dinosaurs...
nextthought 2 years ago
@next thought. Glad you mentioned past warming, like in the Jurassic period. There was more CO2 back then, and of course a higher temperature. That's actually historical evidence showing that there is climate-sensitivity and positive feedback from CO2. It helps demonstrate that humans can affect the climate today - which we're doing.
gewsh 2 years ago
So you understand that there numerous sources on the earth for CO2 emissions. The number 1 source is the ocean others that produce far more than we do are plants in decay and volcanoes. We are actually way down the list as CO2 producers. Plus CO2 does ot compare to methane as a greenhouse gas we should probably pave over swamps and kill all the cows... you know whatever it takes. Along with deindustrailization carbon taxes making Gore our King and concentrating wealth in the hands of the few.
nextthought 2 years ago
@nextthought - Of course there are plenty of sources of CO2. But it's about balance. The ocean emits a lot of CO2 but also absorbs a lot of CO2. The problem is that it is the human additions that are tipping the balance so that the planet warms and causes various negative effects. That's the key, not the proportions. Methane is a potent GHG too, but has a different life cycle. One of the mitigating factors is that at least it disappears from the atmosphere a lot quicker than CO2.
gewsh 2 years ago
Gewsh you may not be aware of the massive increase i plant life on the planet...There are a third more trees in europe now since WWII... This is partly true do to the petro we now burn; instead of trees... In the USA the volume of tree have increased dramatically from 40 per acre to 200 this is mainly due to fire fighting practices but it has created new problems so much fuel the fire get so hot they damage the soil. CO2 is our friend it is only about 1/2% of the atmosphere.
nextthought 2 years ago
@nextthought - CO2 can be our friend, but too much of it causes GW which has serious impacts on agriculture, health and environment. CO2 has increased about 25% since 1800. The % of CO2 as a proportion of the atmosphere isn't important here. Nor is reforestation of Europe post-WWII. That short-term, localised planting just means nothing within the big picture. These little bits and pieces of information you throw around mean nothing in the context of the real GW science I'm afraid.
gewsh 2 years ago
Gewsh youre polite and somewhat relevant but your homework is incomplete. We know global was about 2c higher during the medieval warming period 2c colder a few hundred years known as the little ice age. In 1888 when Krakatau erupted world temperature drop by 2c even with a huge amount of carbon expelled. The Sun controls our climate it always has. The only thing we will get is new taxes criminal carbon credits if this goes forward
nextthought 2 years ago
Actually nthought, the Medieval warm period you're talking about only had warmness in certain regions, and other regions showed strong cooling. Globally, the temperatures then were cooler than today. It's also not the sun. There's been no trend in solar activity in the last 60 years. And the Krakatoa issue is about aerosols (dust/ash) which reflect heat and cool the temp. Just to clarify, are you really saying that increased CO2 does not warm the planet? Because that fact is well understood.
gewsh 2 years ago
Yes I threw you a little bit of a red herring and you have demonstrated you have some actual knowledge but you dis