stick your hockey stick in your bottom so what about the buildings in green land dating back from medieval times cunt you lot of bullshit mother fuckers wont to believe in mmgw so bad you lot can't stand it if someone shoots you down and you'll say anything to keep the fantasy going
@greenman3610 so your saying there's no buildings on green land that green land is named green land as some sort of joke you can quote crap all you like fucker any normal person can see straight through all the bullshit ipcc = bullshit, scientists = bullshit , un = bullshit, al gore = bullshit any person in the street will tell you global warming = bullshit so this hole propaganda machine is failing . the people know the truth and we wont actual proof not predictions not computer models
@greenman3610 your grants looking shaky isn't it, your funding might be pulled, what are going to do then .come up with some other load of nonsense . meteors from outer space, cosmic rays or go back to that one from the 90's thinning ozone layer. 24821 hits not nearly enough got to come up with some more fantastic claims. some more complete nonsense well good luck doom sayer
@greenman3610 so its all right to insult me. But let's get back to your attack on medieval warm period alarmist have hated that graph because the world was warmer that doesn't fit the propaganda, so make up some study wallah presto its gone. Are you going to green land and go around and get rid of the ruins there and say, what ruins.
check your comment above, guv. I'd say you've made yourself fair game - not just for being ignorant, but for being obnoxious. But I like it when you guys show your true colors, so rave away -- just try to keep it clean.
re greenland, again-
watch?v=G80mIbF5yEg
and
watch?v=c90nab5i-TQ
while you're at it - but only if you wish to deal in fact.
@greenman3610 every time i make a point you put some bogas reference and not answer the question or you insult me that's not scientific debate that's like all alarmist nazi ass holes. Earth temperature has rise because the earth is coming out of the little ice age and its been rising for the last 150years nothing to do with man (co2)
@greenman3610 you don't have fact's you have propaganda for the cult of global warming anyone can fiddle data, hide the decline and misrepresent, twist theory all you like. You are part of a dangerous cult that will hurt America's economy and not achieve a thing except line your own pockets
@greenman3610 Michael Mann was caught doing bad science ,he published a false graph were he hid the decline in temperature. His tree ring data was inaccurate and also refused to share data. That's bad science. That's fraudulent science.But you lot of alarmist monkey's insist he did nothing wrong, get off it. A true scientist should be impartial ready to look at actual fact's plus observation to confirm his findings, with a proper peer review process, something that's been lacking
@greenman3610 more lies and yet more lies and no peer review process and the ipcc published it. really trustworthy organisation and what makes you think I should believe anything you and your gang of alarmist scientists come up with now?
you offer no evidence that a "vast majority" believe anything, other than the assertions of this gentleman with the speech impediment, and Chris Monckton, who also claims to be a British Lord, and to have cured AIDS.
Sorry, I'll go with the National Academies of every country who agree that the world is warming and we are doing it.
@greenman3610 You find PEOPLE on the net that say different but you don`t find thousands of scientists arguing about tobacco, HIV or the moon landing. What we really should do is to do research on our own like these people watch?v=LcsvaCPYgcI they are the only ones who can say something, not us. We are just talking about what he said, she said. You are just taking sides and try (poorly) to defend them. I take sides too, but i take the more logical one.
A government run science panel investigating government funded science that a questionable 'scientist' completed with results that world governments depend on to institute a massive tax on every man woman and child... Nope, I don't see any problems here.
Carbon tax is a disgusting crime against Humanity. CO2 whether man-made or otherwise doesn't drive global climate, it never has, it never will, the Sun does...
the paper trail is there for all to see. That's why every investigation of the so - called "climategate" nothing burger has turned up just that. nothing.
@greenman3610 Well they didnt cover up what a crock their "climate model " was. Mainstream press forgot to mention that the e mails and other data included source code for the model . Search devils kitchen climate model. Ho Ho Ho
These are the same types who say that C02 in the atmosphere remained a constant and static, "280 parts per million" for like 2 million years! Although early measurements made by scientists in the 1800's and early 1900's have some errors, there are thousands of readings which indicate atmospheric c02 may have risen to over 300 to 400 parts per million as recently as 1941 during the first great warming period of the 20th century. If anything, these readings deserve more research suppression.
@GarfoyleZanderfield No one denies co2 levels, princess. The issue is that this forces climate change. Its not proven ! The theory came out of a crank swede scientist...oh go read about it ! Of course as a Geologist I know CO2 has been 10x higher and the world didnt frazzle then..so why now..cos big Al said so . !
@GarfoyleZanderfield Yes sorry , below the belt , just seems as though your comments reflected those of an immature,uniformed female intellect. I do apologize most profusely !
Man made warming is overrated and you could cal it a hoax for sure.
I heard Murray Salby has a report to be coming out soon that will blow all climate alarmists theories to pieces.
CO2 after the turn of the century continued to increase, in fact if anything, slightly faster, but global temperature didn’t. If anything, it decreased in the first decade of the 21st century." - Murray Salby
All these climate doomsayers arguments are based on evidence of temperatures over recent times instead of looking at least 10000 years but no, they're cherry-picking evidence to advance an agenda. Something sinister is going on here...
@greenman360 it is obvious that neither you nor ben stein will ever allow facts to confuse your agenda. the sources i checked included such obscure places as MIT, BRSOS, NASA, etc. I give up- I cannot break your faith. give me a shout when the world ends.
mit joint program on the science and policy of climate change
both sites have a wealth of information, and are very clear on climate. Dude, I talk to/email these guys every week. If you are going to try to BS someone, the Glenn Beck site is best for you.
Scroll Down the comments, I cited about 40 different peer reviewed studies around the world that show the MWP to be real, global, and warmer than today.... He still ignored them, this video is a sham...
I haven't seen a subject as politicized, contorted, manipulated, bastardized and discredited as climate science. Whole periods of the past which were once regarded by science as having existed, just disappear in a decade by researchers who view our modern world as the warmest in the last 600,000 years. Now, I am not going to say we aren't experiencing a warm period, or hadn't between 1980 and 2002, but to say it was the warmest in 600,000 years! How the hell can anyone know that.
Well we 'can' monitor temperature changes through 'PROXIES'. But that's the problem, its not a direct measurement and many different factors can affect it. Tree Ring data for instance is HEAVILY weighted by local populations of animals (fertilizer), rain fall (precipitation), differing species of trees, insects, geography, sunlight, etc.
The whole problem with 'hide the decline' and Mann is he was hiding all the proxy data that DISAGREED with him!
@Funkyflorist you wouldnt know a peer reviewed study if it hit you in the neck ! Are you a florist or a scientist ! If nit a scientist shut the F up and leave gracefully , and take Al the man and the "wannabee" pseudo climate scientific mob with you ! If they had graduated in a REAL science they wouldnt be in the hokus pokus world world of climate science . poof Halcyon !
"Nester, P.L., Gayo, E., Latorre, C., Jordan, T.E. and Blanco, N. 2007. Perennial stream discharge in the hyper-arid Atacama Desert of northern Chile during the latest Pleistocene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 104: 19,724-19,729."
OH, IT KINDA IS! Too bad it contradicts this whole video...
And where was I wrong with my statement on proxies?
@greenman360 After rechecking the research (NOT googling) I have come to the following conclusion: you are either naive or being deliberately deciteful. I will assume the former condition applies; which can be easily rectified by actually studying the Science and not the hype.
@greenman360 DAMN this tiny keyboard! Anyways the erruption of Mt. St. Helens discharged more pollutants into the atmosphere than all the pollution produced by man since the industrial revolution.
If you go to the US geological survey, by googling
USGS volcanic gases climate
you will find that humans discharge 100 times as much greenhouse gases annually as volcanoes.
We have become a geological force of nature, and are changing the atmosphere thousands of times faster than nature has over the last 55 million years. For more, see
@greenman360 sorry about the cut-off, phone ran out of juice. Anyways, what's with you and glen beck? You do realize he's a fruitcake? Back to ACC, it's the anthropogenic bit that had no evidence- not climate change. Earth's climate is and has always been dynamic; there are no static systems in nature. Man-made pollution is unquestionably endemic to local ecosystems, but it hasa statistically insignifigant effect on global climste- relative to natural factors.
again, most climate deniers are fruitcakes, he's no exception.
Since you are going against the overwhelming body of research over the last 150 years, the least you might do is offer some evidence or citation for why you believe what you do.
Otherwise, you risk sounding like just another fruitcake.
@greenman360 The scientific evidence refutes the ACC claims so clearly that it's bewildering how people give it any credence. That said I beleive ACC is a purely political/propoganda vehicle. While I beleieve that less pollution is better than more, the actions of organizations like the IPCC have destroyed any credibility the green movement had. When the predicteddisa
yeah, it's like, crazy that the National Science academies of every country, and every relevant scientific body on the planet say this is happening, when Glenn Beck, and you, have discovered it's all wrong....
@greenman360 after watching more of your videos I'm starting to think you don't understand the meanings of many words: science, data, fact, falsification, theory, and so on. Passion is NOT proof. Neither is propaganda evidence. It's easy to make baseless but hysterical statements; actually learning about something is hard huh?
If nothing is 'hidden' then why do their own programs include "Censored" data? Are you saying that they didn't "HIDE" anything? That would contradict their own CRU e-mails!
weird How is the MWP an act of faith when ancient people reported the findings ! weird USA people should not be allowed to comment on shit that is older than the age of the USA , they have no comprehension. I have old grape vines that no longer bear fruit but grow in my garden . I live in Aberdeenshire . My house is 1000 yrs old ..its actually a castle so greenies and yanks go f** off haha
@klnine Unfortunately, most Americans are ignorant of world history. That's how these alarmists were able to fool so many in blaming increased Atlantic hurricanes on global warming. If they tell Asians that global warming increases either the number or intensity of tropical cyclones, they'd be laughed at because the most prolific and intense tropical cyclone seasons were the Pacific typhoon seasons from 1950 to 1980, a time of cooler temperatures. Most Americans don't even know what a typhoon is
@AmericaSpeakOut1 I took a look at your source and noticed several inconsistencies 1) many of the graphs didn't show the last few decades (the perioed attributed to human rather than natural primary forcings) 2) Several didn't show the last 500. 3) Several were "adapted from", why not show the original? 4) One from 1975 had obviously been altered and added to more recntly using microsoft paint?
I am MOST intrigued by this chart of Earth's historical temperature and carbon dioxide levels. It reveals that CO2 really is not tied to temperature. It also reveals that we now live in a relative ice age compared to the historical average, and that today's CO2 levels are extremely low compared to the historical average.
Average Global Temperature and CO2 - Today's world is starved for CO2 and very cold compared to the past
the graph you reference comes from a West Virginia Coal mine safety engineer (I know, ironic) who basically distorts what the science says. For more complete information, see
watch?v=uE6at2IEUOU
and
watch?v=ZGFAWzjO378
As we get more information, the apparent discrepencies between co2 levels and temps have gone away, and the GHG/Temp link has just gotten stronger.
For a longer view of 4 billion years of history, google
@greenman3610 I made the mistake of watching two of your videos already, then posted rebuttals showing how very wrong they were. You still haven't adjusted your MWP video to account for all the astonishing finds in Antarctica revealing its powerful effects down there, as well as beginning earlier in the southern hemisphere.
Sorry, but your videos are just plain dishonest and are therefore not learning tools. YOU are dishonest in not correcting them.
Nasa reveals cooling sun - consequences are severe
The past month was Britain's coldest December for 120 years, meteorologists have said. The benchmark Central England Temperature plunged to an average of -0.6C over the month, the lowest figure for December since 1890, according to MeteoGroup UK, the weather forecasting division of the Press Association.
No magic involved. As the upper atmosphere cools, convective cooling of the surface increases resulting in the record cold being reported in so many places now.
Once the El Nino effect wears off, this could get really bad, like the cooling period from 1945 to 1980.
Nasa is an excellent source of information. The link you provided, however, is from 2003, and states that if a very small change in solar irradiance persisted for a century, it would affect global temps.
In the last few years, we have in fact been in the deepest solar minimum in a century, and still having the warmest years on record. So you are using good info in a dishonest, or ignorant way. Which is it?
@greenman3610 The deep solar minimum was reported about two years ago, coinciding with record cold causing bleaching of coral reefs and other not-so-amusing events. However, a great deal of ocean water was warmed during the prior warming cycle and is still circulating that warmth, temporarily offsetting the full extent of solar-forced cooling.
The resurgence of El Niño means that 2010 could yet be the hottest year on record
@AmericaSpeakOut1 On the NASA 2009 article: Did you read it? "this warming has no implications for climate change in the troposphere" i.e. AGW. On the 2003 article did you read it in full? e.g. this bit: " the inferred increase of solar irradiance in 24 years, about 0.1 percent, is not enough to cause notable climate change"
@checkyoursources You are somewhat distorting, through the sin of omission. What you're writing about is some guesswork about the future. Here's more:
"The research team expects the atmosphere to heat up again as solar activity starts to pick up in the next year. While this warming has no implications for climate change in the troposphere..."
Actual changes and effects remain to be seen. So, you've added pretty much nothing to our understanding with this.
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Nope, I just included the bits you missed. p.s. they were referring to the upper atmosphere, not the troposphere. Have you read Lockwoods paper on this from 2010 yet?
@checkyoursources I just quoted directly from the article we are discussing. They used the word troposphere. I included the bits YOU omitted. They are talking about future projections, not current observances. You left out the "expects" qualifier.
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Yes they used the word troposphere preceded by "While this warming has no implications for climate change in the troposphere" meaning that the level of change in the solar output would only be significant in the troposphere (and therefore responsible for recent global warming) if maintained for 100 years! With the Sun in a current solar minimum and 2010 as the warmest year on modern record according to the WMO do you still think the Sun is the primary driver at the moment?
@checkyoursources But we know WHY 2010 was, on average, as warm as 2005. It was that OTHER major contributing factor, the oceans spreading around heat energy that they had collected during earlier solar warming...
The resurgence of El Niño means that 2010 could yet be the hottest year on record
@AmericaSpeakOut1 The analysis records the temps globally so location is irrelevant. Land temps saw more highs than lows, Only the UK and US saw significantly cold temps, the majority had warmer temps such as Africa, southern and western Asia, and the northern extremities of North America, including Greenland. We must avoid looking at individual years and look at longer periods such as the last four decades which showed consistent warming.
@checkyoursources Man, you are really stuck in the last four decades, since we were recovering from the COOLING period of the previous two decades. No - you don't get to narrow it down to a time scale that only demonstrates a recovery from a cooling period. How about, let's look at the last 1200 years. Yeah, that's the ticket, start in the Medieval Warm Period.
Or, let's start in the mid-Holocene Warm Period. That's even MORE fun. My, we're a bit cold now, aren't we? Yes, we are.
@AmericaSpeakOut1 What MWP? Oh you mean the regional, non-global one, which is irrelevant to recent warming as the causes are different, you wouldn't say lightning is the only possible cause for starting a fire once matches were used so why say that the current 4 decades of change are "natural". If you play the look at irrelevant past periods game then look back 15 million years and you could say we have just ended a cooling period. Climate reacts to whatever forces it-currently its mostly us.
@checkyoursources I'm referring to the global MWP that affected the world from Antarctica to Greenland, as published studies in GEOLOGY reveal. We've provided the links to those studies and their publications repeatedly - do you want to see them again? Maybe they'll sink in this time?
You play like a stuck record without learning anything new. Not very scientifically minded of you.
@AmericaSpeakOut1 You haven't given me the links (you comment so often and on so many videos so you may be mistaken about giving them to me personally so please do send them over. Mann 2009 found no global MWP- " falls well below recent levels globally", Nor did J.H. Oerlemans (2005), or Moberg et al (2005) or S. Huang (2004). The AGU conference in San Fran last year apparently had a summary also concluding that the MWP was not global (i'll look up the lecture for you if it's still there).
"ice was at or behind its present position at ca. 700-970 cal. yr B.P," implying that "the present state of reduced ice on the western Antarctic Peninsula is not unprecedented," which means that this period was at least as warm as, or likely even warmer than, the peak warmth of the Current Warm Period. (Geology 38: 635-638)
Primarily summer climatic conditions were inferred from a record preserved in authigenic carbonate retrieved from sediments of Sombre Lake on Signy Island, maritime Antarctica. The Medieval Warm Period (AD 1130-1215) was warmer than the Current Warm Period. (The Holocene 13: 251-263)
Changes in the location of the edge of the Amery Ice Shelf were inferred from measurements of biogenic opal, absolute diatom abundance and the abundance of Fragilariopsis curta found in sediments retrieved from beneath the ice shelf at a point that is currently 80 km from land's edge. The MWP at ca. 750 14C yr BP was likely warmer than at any time during the CWP. (Geology 31: 127-130)
Climate evolution ... is inferred from the multiproxy analyses of a long (928 cm) sediment core retrieved from Maxwell Bay off King George Island. The medieval warming occurred earlier in the Southern than in the Northern Hemisphere, which might indicate that the warming was driven by processes occurring in the south. (Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 2010; v. 344; p. 243-260;)
@checkyoursources I have presented you with several very recent studies, published in GEOLOGY and elsewhere, indicating that Antarctica was warmer than today and that the warming started there earlier than it did in the northern hemisphere. If you wish to learn more, follow the links.
These studies are helping to answer the question as to whether the MWP was limited to a region in northern Europe and Greenland. The answer is NO. Further supported by the global chart I provided.
The key to it all is this: It affected the Northern and Southern Hemispheres and affected Antarctica far more than the current warming period. Evidence of it is found on all continents when one looks at the right indicators.
@checkyoursources Finally, it seems clear that Mann is a fraud and determined to thwart honest peer review of his work. This is an interesting read from one of his peers who attempted to show Mann where he was wrong.
Michael Mann - erroneous methodologies, silencing the peer review
h t t ps: //public. me. com/ix/williseschenbach/Svalbard.pdf
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Yet again you clog the comments section. Please limit your comments to one at a time. Please refer to this on the MWP: It summarises all the recent work by a variety of people: A42D Charney Lecture Past and Contemporary Climate Change: Evidence From Earth's Ice Cover"
It's a presentation at the recent AGU conference by E. S. Mosley-Thompson.
You do appreciate that past climate changes are not caused by the same factor as current ones? i.e. my match and lightning example.
@checkyoursources You ASKED me to provide the links. Don't complain when I do. I said "links". That's plural. I provided them with brief abstracts to ensure you would see some of the conclusions of the studies involved, namely that the MWP began earlier in the southern hemisphere, had a much greater effect on Antarctica than today's warming period and the global chart shows how it affected ALL continents.
You now have some "links" - plural - to help adjust your worldview to fit the facts.
Just thought it might be a good idea to take stock being 31 December and all. What year was the hottest since instrumental records began? 2010 I think, so if that means we are entering a cooling cycle, David, could I have your tips for the Dow next year please?
As for the freeze in the northern hemisphere; consistent with a slowing gulf stream.
The floods in northern Australia at the moment and the bushfires two years ago in southern Australia; consistent with model predictions.
@greenman3610 Hey everyone! watch Bill Nye get slaughtered by Richard Lindzen on Larry King> Bill Nye is a know nothing,, as bad as greenman, just as dishonest....he got eaten alive.
@pointyhead1 "Science by debate". Hey, just like the good ol' days when churches, or dictators could "prove the science" by having a louder voice. Try looking up the church proving over Galileo (he had actual data, climate denier blogo-scientists have to make up their own or "cherry pick"), and Lamarck (promoted in the Soviet Union). "Winning a debate" is easy. Hey, Hitler was a great speaker and "won the debate" in Germany, was he right? Lucky real science does not work like that. Data wins
@pointyhead1 Yeah all Bill Nye has got to offer is the published science (thousands of real scientific papers) by actual climatologists- corroborated by atmospheric physicists and actual satellite observations, whereas Lindzen has his opinions- talking outside his area of expertise, with no published papers to support him. Yeah, go for Lindzen and wait for the planet to get so stuffed up that we all suffer. Just so we can continue to burn up fossil fuels at massive, increasing rates.
But I thought you objected to notions of "science by debate" That's what you addressed to me as your seeming complaint, it seemed.
When I point out that the subject of "Ask Bill Nye" was was raised by another, and that there is a reason to see what Bill has to offer, then you seem to want to argue that Bill has something to offer on Climate and Lindzen does not.
That is fine, but it's not what you were complaining about. Is it ?
@indulis1 Are you sure that YOU want to claim that Blll Nye has all this science to his name ? Or that he can access it just the same as you or tI can ?
whereas, I am led to believe that you are unaware that Lindzen is both soft spoken, and has "IPCC Lead Author" under HIS belt,
indulis, I thought someone might claim such a debate was not fair, because Lindzen is a scientist, but Bill Nye is a only a TV personality.
But you made me laugh so hard I thought I'd share my enjoyment. You, though, like, right out of the blue, just say that Bill Nye is a heavier weight than Richard Lindzen !
Surprise me again sometime with something so wonderful, won't you ?
I would like to thank Greenman for giving us this opportunity to explain just how incorrect the AGW Faithful, the "flat-earthers" who cannot grasp environmental science, who have no grasp of the extent of the Medieval Climate Optimum, really are.
If there's any greenhouse gas map on the world that correlates with warming and cooling trends, it's not a map of CO2. It's a map of methane which shows highest levels in the Arctic and lowest levels in the Antarctic. Greenman doesn't mention methane much because he drank the carbonated (CO2) Kool-Aid!
I challenge Greenman to explain why some of the areas that are warming up the most (i.e. the Arctic) have the lowest concentrations of CO2 on earth. I have an explanation that does not necessarily disproves CO2 as a greenhouse gas, but I don't think Greenman can.
@greenman3610 He nailed that one? Ummm... NO! Even Al Gore later admitted that his model was oversimplified and now he's stating that methane and soot played a larger role than previously thought. And no, you can't shoot that climate denier rants on me because I'm not one. I'm just saying that his claims have been exaggerated and have been rebuked by other scientists (the "consensus" scientists and NOT the fringe "big oil" ones)
Well, we know mankind contributes a paltry 0.28% to the atmosphere's heat-catching ability. However, we also know there's not enough CO2 in the atmosphere to "cause" global warming - it is solar driven. The drastic cooling spell from 1945 to about 1980 occurred even as industry pumped CO2 into the atmosphere. At 0.038% of total atmospheric content, it has very little temperature effect.
It does, however, cause the plants to grow better.
@AmericaSpeakOut1 I can not agree with your exact numbers on mankind's contribution to warming, but I do agree completely with you on that these sensationalist projections have more holes than Swiss Cheese and Jenna Jameson put together! They can't explain the post WWII cooling. They blame the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season on global warming, yet they cannot explain why the most active recorded Pacific typhoon years happened during years of global cooling not warming.
@mrdrfez "I can not agree with your exact numbers on mankind's contribution to warming"
You might find this study of atmospheric gases informative:
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
geocraft. com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
The folks holding these big "redistribute the wealth" meetings in places like Cancun are not interested in the science. They're done paying lip service to it and are simply figuring out how much to take, who gets it and when. Scientific truth will not stop them.
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Yes, I have long known that water vapor is the biggest greenhouse gas. However, reports on the exact numerical value of water vapor and CO2 vary greatly without even taking that one into the equation. These alarmists have shot themselves in the foot repeatedly. By consistently pushing doomsday scenarios based on hypothetical extremes that have been contradicted by science, they have destroyed their own credibility
@greenman3610 Yes, but I have asked you to explain 9% to 26% variation in greenhouse contribution of CO2. And no, that data wasn't from some fringe climate denier site.
the reason numbers vary as to co2's contribution, or any gas's contribution, is that the various molecules absorb over a range of frequencies, and these freqencies are not neatly boxed in, like a denialist's mind.
They overlap. There are gray areas.
So there is a range given when estimates are made.
It's science. We have gray areas and error bars.
for more exact numbers, see recent peer reviewed paper, google
Atmospheric CO2: Principal Control Knob Governing Earth’s Temperature
@greenman3610 Now, here you go shooting off insults accusing people of being denialists. Are you a climate scientist? The existence of such a wide range of grey areas means that further research needs to be conducted before we can come up with an accurate climate model. All you do is end everything with: "polar ice caps melting, and sea level rising" Yes, I know that. Unless you can give more thorough explanation instead of just the same positive correlation rant, we can't believe you.
@greenman3610 If CO2 is the principal "knob", why could it not stop the centuries-long Ice Age after the Medieval Climate Optimum? Why could it not stop the rather deadly, decades-long cooling in the first half of last century? Why, as that Sahara example demonstrated, can it not trap heat from escaping the Earth even for a few hours?
Why can it not stop each and every Ice Age that begins when CO2 has reached its maximum due to warming?
@greenman3610 The claim is bunk - it is Earth's oceans and water heat transfer systems that retain the sun's heat, not CO2.
That Sahara Desert example is a good illustration, when compared to the Amazon Jungle. The CO2 can not trap heat but water vapor does it very effectively.
The Sahara Desert goes from 120 degrees in the daytime to BELOW FREEZING at night in the Summer because CO2 cannot trap heat even for a few hours. It is insignificant in the heat-trapping picture. All that heat just pisses off into space.
The Amazon remains warm all night long. Water vapor is the difference.
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Methane which has went up 230% from pre-industrial levels is deemed at least 21 times more potent than CO2. Yet Greenman and the other alarmists keep singling out CO2 as the culprit without looking much at methane. Why? Because Al Gore told them to. It's really suspect how Al Gore and the rest ignored a much more dangerous gas so perhaps they did have something to profit from eliminating CO2.
@GunTrainers Methane's average life in the atmosphere lasts around 10 to 12 years which is much shorter than CO2. This means that a drastic reduction in methane would have much quicker effects on the climate than reducing CO2 emissions. Why wouldn't they want to do more research on methane reduction? Something fishy is going on.
@mrdrfez I notice the alarmist posts by Nightversionn and others constantly say something horrible "could" happen or "may" happen, without indicating it is "likely" to happen. Of course, that's the same strategy they employed in the 1970s, warning us glaciers "could" return to crush New York and 70% of animal life "could" be extinct by the year 2000.
Despite being consistently wrong, they push forward with their schemes to steal our money. That is the real goal.
And for the record, I do believe that manmade global warming is real, and I do not listen to Rush Limbaugh. I also believe that we need to lower greenhouse gas emissions. However, that does NOT mean that I'm going to drink the Kool-Aid by accepting everything that Al Gore and other sensationalist charlatans say.
@greenman3610 There... I have thrown data at you that you cannot explain or post as crocks, and I have debunked some of your crocks, and now you're calling me names. Oh yes, I question your positions and your knowledge so therefore I must be a climate denier, big oil backer, and Holocaust denier.
The ice, says Magnusson, has retreated by almost 100 meters (328 feet) since he began raising reindeer more than 10 years ago. "Every meter means more pasture for my animals," says Magnusson, "and each additional day they're able to graze on a green pasture adds half a pound to their weight."
Large sections of the northern hemisphere enjoyed a period of unusually mild weather at the time. Climate models based on data from ice cores show that temperatures plunged quite abruptly in the 14th century, triggering a minor ice age and probably driving the Vikings from Greenland. The last known records document a wedding in the church of Hvalsøy on Sept. 16, 1408. Today, all that remains of the Vikings' rural life on Greenland are the foundations of their houses.
Maybe you don't like the facts about Greenland but...
Known for its massive ice sheets, Greenland is feeling the effects of global warming as rising temperatures have expanded the island's growing season and crops are flourishing. For the first time in hundreds of years, it has become possible to raise cattle and start dairy farms.
Got that? The mini-Ice Age, from which we are just recovering, put a temporary end to those farms. Well, they're coming back!
@AmericaSpeakOut1 History has shown that there was a lot more famine and warfare during cold periods than warm periods. Also, the most active year for Pacific typhoons on record was 1964 (39 storms) which was a relatively cool period. Alarmists would dismiss this as a mere anomaly but would like to say that the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season was due to global warming.
A great deal of new information from scientific studies of Antarctica reveals that the Medieval Warm Period was not just isolated to a small area of the Northern Hemisphere - it even drove Antarctica to warmer temperatures than today. Scientists publishing in Geology Magazine have been studying the effects of the MWP on Antarctica, finding that the ice melt was more significant then than it is today, among other indicators.
stick your hockey stick in your bottom so what about the buildings in green land dating back from medieval times cunt you lot of bullshit mother fuckers wont to believe in mmgw so bad you lot can't stand it if someone shoots you down and you'll say anything to keep the fantasy going
vmgqie 4 weeks ago
@vmgqie
My aren't we well spoken and rational.
re Greenland nonsense
watch?v=G80mIbF5yEg
greenman3610 4 weeks ago
@greenman3610 so your saying there's no buildings on green land that green land is named green land as some sort of joke you can quote crap all you like fucker any normal person can see straight through all the bullshit ipcc = bullshit, scientists = bullshit , un = bullshit, al gore = bullshit any person in the street will tell you global warming = bullshit so this hole propaganda machine is failing . the people know the truth and we wont actual proof not predictions not computer models
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@vmgqie
are you a product of homeschooling, by any chance?
greenman3610 3 weeks ago
@greenman3610 your grants looking shaky isn't it, your funding might be pulled, what are going to do then .come up with some other load of nonsense . meteors from outer space, cosmic rays or go back to that one from the 90's thinning ozone layer. 24821 hits not nearly enough got to come up with some more fantastic claims. some more complete nonsense well good luck doom sayer
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@greenman3610 get fucked mother fucken ass hole
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@vmgqie
once again, apologies to all - but I'll leave this here as a reminder of what we are dealing with.
greenman3610 3 weeks ago
@greenman3610 so its all right to insult me. But let's get back to your attack on medieval warm period alarmist have hated that graph because the world was warmer that doesn't fit the propaganda, so make up some study wallah presto its gone. Are you going to green land and go around and get rid of the ruins there and say, what ruins.
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@vmgqie
"so its all right to insult me."
check your comment above, guv. I'd say you've made yourself fair game - not just for being ignorant, but for being obnoxious. But I like it when you guys show your true colors, so rave away -- just try to keep it clean.
re greenland, again-
watch?v=G80mIbF5yEg
and
watch?v=c90nab5i-TQ
while you're at it - but only if you wish to deal in fact.
greenman3610 3 weeks ago
@greenman3610 I must have missed something I go to your reference and draw a blank
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@greenman3610 every time i make a point you put some bogas reference and not answer the question or you insult me that's not scientific debate that's like all alarmist nazi ass holes. Earth temperature has rise because the earth is coming out of the little ice age and its been rising for the last 150years nothing to do with man (co2)
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@vmgqie
"bogas reference"
they're called "facts".
check into it.
greenman3610 3 weeks ago
@greenman3610 you don't have fact's you have propaganda for the cult of global warming anyone can fiddle data, hide the decline and misrepresent, twist theory all you like. You are part of a dangerous cult that will hurt America's economy and not achieve a thing except line your own pockets
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@vmgqie
but apparently not anyone can actually do research and cite sources.
re the "hide the decline" lie
watch?v=tz8Ve6KE-Us
greenman3610 3 weeks ago
@greenman3610 Michael Mann was caught doing bad science ,he published a false graph were he hid the decline in temperature. His tree ring data was inaccurate and also refused to share data. That's bad science. That's fraudulent science.But you lot of alarmist monkey's insist he did nothing wrong, get off it. A true scientist should be impartial ready to look at actual fact's plus observation to confirm his findings, with a proper peer review process, something that's been lacking
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
@vmgqie
"refused to share data"
whole story here.
watch?v=tz8Ve6KE-Us
mann's data was published online for anyone to see with the original journal, 1998.
greenman3610 3 weeks ago
@greenman3610 more lies and yet more lies and no peer review process and the ipcc published it. really trustworthy organisation and what makes you think I should believe anything you and your gang of alarmist scientists come up with now?
vmgqie 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vmgqie "get fucked mother fucken ass hole"
Are you trolling, or is this serious?
thesparitan 3 weeks ago
ask the IPCC where the hokey stick is now cause they try to hide it like they never supported it.
andreiuta171 1 month ago
@andreiuta171
IPCC fourth assessment report, chapter 6, page 467, figure 6.10.
see the line labeled "MBH 1999" - aka the Hockey Stick.
If you want to be taken seriously,
why don't you actually do some reading and research?
greenman3610 1 month ago
well then, what`s this all about? watch?v=u1rj00BoItw&feature=related
a vast majority of scientists agree that medieval warm period was real and global
andreiuta171 1 month ago
@andreiuta171
you offer no evidence that a "vast majority" believe anything, other than the assertions of this gentleman with the speech impediment, and Chris Monckton, who also claims to be a British Lord, and to have cured AIDS.
Sorry, I'll go with the National Academies of every country who agree that the world is warming and we are doing it.
greenman3610 1 month ago
@greenman3610 you offer the same evidence as me - other people saying things. Why is it that your people are better than mine? Just because?
andreiuta171 1 month ago
@andreiuta171
Well, my people ARE better than yours - mainly because the mainstream science has been honed over 150 years of rigorous peer review.
It's the same reason we believe that tobacco causes lung disease, HIV causes AIDS, and NASA actually landed on the moon.
You can find lots of people on the internet who will say different, but they are outliers at best, and at worst, out and outliars.
In today's media world, you can live in a fantasy if you choose. I choose the scientific method.
greenman3610 1 month ago
@greenman3610 You find PEOPLE on the net that say different but you don`t find thousands of scientists arguing about tobacco, HIV or the moon landing. What we really should do is to do research on our own like these people watch?v=LcsvaCPYgcI they are the only ones who can say something, not us. We are just talking about what he said, she said. You are just taking sides and try (poorly) to defend them. I take sides too, but i take the more logical one.
andreiuta171 1 month ago
A government run science panel investigating government funded science that a questionable 'scientist' completed with results that world governments depend on to institute a massive tax on every man woman and child... Nope, I don't see any problems here.
liOVERLOADil 2 months ago
Man is not causing the warming and scientist can't prove it.
Once the temperature goes down it will be game over.
The IPCC is a joke.
MrPurpose79 4 months ago
as soon as the ross ice shelf collapses i bet the skeptics will be silent for a while as it is expected to raise the oceans by 6 inches to a foot.
vengencefrom1979 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Carbon tax is a disgusting crime against Humanity. CO2 whether man-made or otherwise doesn't drive global climate, it never has, it never will, the Sun does...
The Great Global Warming Swindle [Full Film]
watch?v=T8KgbUvsC_o
Galv140577 5 months ago
I would prefer to watch FAKE ALIEN AUTOPSY movies than watch this fraud promotion.
Defending Michael Mann. Holy shit.
GarfoyleZanderfield 5 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield
since Mann's work has been repeatedly replicated and validated, it would be dishonest to say otherwise. In fact, for even more on his work, see
watch?v=tz8Ve6KE-Us
obviously you find alien autopsies more to your liking. I prefer dull old fact.
greenman3610 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@greenman3610
Have you bothered to follow through with the 40 sources I cited... Are you still going to ignore them?
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@greenman3610
Have you bothered to follow through with the 40 sources I cited...
Are you still going to ignore them?
Funkyflorist 3 months ago
Oh great! Michael Mann took over to re-write what really happened.
This guy is under investigation. He is known to have manipulated data in his graphs, complements of Climategate emails. Remember the HOCKEY STICK?
GarfoyleZanderfield 5 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield
the paper trail is there for all to see. That's why every investigation of the so - called "climategate" nothing burger has turned up just that. nothing.
watch?v=tz8Ve6KE-Us
greenman3610 5 months ago
@greenman3610 Well they didnt cover up what a crock their "climate model " was. Mainstream press forgot to mention that the e mails and other data included source code for the model . Search devils kitchen climate model. Ho Ho Ho
klnine 4 months ago
@greenman3610
Or the paper trail that runs ALL OVER the world disproving this whole video?
Funkyflorist 3 months ago
I meant to say, more research not suppression.
GarfoyleZanderfield 5 months ago
These are the same types who say that C02 in the atmosphere remained a constant and static, "280 parts per million" for like 2 million years! Although early measurements made by scientists in the 1800's and early 1900's have some errors, there are thousands of readings which indicate atmospheric c02 may have risen to over 300 to 400 parts per million as recently as 1941 during the first great warming period of the 20th century. If anything, these readings deserve more research suppression.
GarfoyleZanderfield 5 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield No one denies co2 levels, princess. The issue is that this forces climate change. Its not proven ! The theory came out of a crank swede scientist...oh go read about it ! Of course as a Geologist I know CO2 has been 10x higher and the world didnt frazzle then..so why now..cos big Al said so . !
klnine 4 months ago
@klnine
Princess?
GarfoyleZanderfield 4 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield Yes sorry , below the belt , just seems as though your comments reflected those of an immature,uniformed female intellect. I do apologize most profusely !
klnine 4 months ago
@klnine
Thanks. And about Anthropogenic global warming, it's a crock of shit.
GarfoyleZanderfield 4 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield idiot
lennyhipp 1 month ago
@lennyhipp
... ?
GarfoyleZanderfield 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GarfoyleZanderfield "...?"
if it was you that said "about Anthropogenic global warming, it's a crock of shit.", then you're an idiot.
if i got the wrong guy, then i'm an idiot for accusing the wrong guy... but i'm pretty sure i'm correct.
lennyhipp 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Man made warming is overrated and you could cal it a hoax for sure.
I heard Murray Salby has a report to be coming out soon that will blow all climate alarmists theories to pieces.
CO2 after the turn of the century continued to increase, in fact if anything, slightly faster, but global temperature didn’t. If anything, it decreased in the first decade of the 21st century." - Murray Salby
firepowerjohan 5 months ago
If the Vikings lived in such a warm climate, hotter than the present day, why the fuck were they always dressed in furs!!
bannor99 6 months ago
All these climate doomsayers arguments are based on evidence of temperatures over recent times instead of looking at least 10000 years but no, they're cherry-picking evidence to advance an agenda. Something sinister is going on here...
SIM2402 7 months ago
@SIM2402
for a 4 billion year perspective, delivered at the American Geophysical Union, google:
the biggest control knob
For a 55 million year overview, see here.
watch?v=ZGFAWzjO378
greenman3610 7 months ago
@greenman360 it is obvious that neither you nor ben stein will ever allow facts to confuse your agenda. the sources i checked included such obscure places as MIT, BRSOS, NASA, etc. I give up- I cannot break your faith. give me a shout when the world ends.
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@jimbocidman
Now you've outed yourself as a baldfaced liar.
viewers curious about what NASA says can google
nasa climate change key indicators
and click on the top hit
Likewise, for MIT, google
mit joint program on the science and policy of climate change
both sites have a wealth of information, and are very clear on climate. Dude, I talk to/email these guys every week. If you are going to try to BS someone, the Glenn Beck site is best for you.
Don't know WTF BRSOS is.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman3610
Is this the same NASA data that was found to be manipulated just a few weeks ago?
You probably don't care anyway, you ignore sources contrary to your belief.
Funkyflorist 5 months ago
@jimbocidman
Scroll Down the comments, I cited about 40 different peer reviewed studies around the world that show the MWP to be real, global, and warmer than today.... He still ignored them, this video is a sham...
Funkyflorist 5 months ago
@Funkyflorist
I haven't seen a subject as politicized, contorted, manipulated, bastardized and discredited as climate science. Whole periods of the past which were once regarded by science as having existed, just disappear in a decade by researchers who view our modern world as the warmest in the last 600,000 years. Now, I am not going to say we aren't experiencing a warm period, or hadn't between 1980 and 2002, but to say it was the warmest in 600,000 years! How the hell can anyone know that.
GarfoyleZanderfield 5 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield
Well we 'can' monitor temperature changes through 'PROXIES'. But that's the problem, its not a direct measurement and many different factors can affect it. Tree Ring data for instance is HEAVILY weighted by local populations of animals (fertilizer), rain fall (precipitation), differing species of trees, insects, geography, sunlight, etc.
The whole problem with 'hide the decline' and Mann is he was hiding all the proxy data that DISAGREED with him!
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield Well princess come work with me for a few years in examining the geology of the last 500 million, quit picking flowers !
klnine 4 months ago
@Funkyflorist you wouldnt know a peer reviewed study if it hit you in the neck ! Are you a florist or a scientist ! If nit a scientist shut the F up and leave gracefully , and take Al the man and the "wannabee" pseudo climate scientific mob with you ! If they had graduated in a REAL science they wouldnt be in the hokus pokus world world of climate science . poof Halcyon !
klnine 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@klnine
Ad hominem...
Ad hominem...
Ad hominem...
Do you have any REAL arguments?
Tell me, is this a peer-reviewed study?
"Nester, P.L., Gayo, E., Latorre, C., Jordan, T.E. and Blanco, N. 2007. Perennial stream discharge in the hyper-arid Atacama Desert of northern Chile during the latest Pleistocene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 104: 19,724-19,729."
OH, IT KINDA IS! Too bad it contradicts this whole video...
And where was I wrong with my statement on proxies?
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
@greenman360 After rechecking the research (NOT googling) I have come to the following conclusion: you are either naive or being deliberately deciteful. I will assume the former condition applies; which can be easily rectified by actually studying the Science and not the hype.
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@jimbocidman
so you checked what, Glenn Beck?
Sorry, I go to the primary sources here. Sorry the facts don't jibe with your opinions.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman3610
Like the 40 sources I cited for you and you ignored? Or does that not 'jibe' with you?
Funkyflorist 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@greenman360 you blocked me?
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@greenman360 DAMN this tiny keyboard! Anyways the erruption of Mt. St. Helens discharged more pollutants into the atmosphere than all the pollution produced by man since the industrial revolution.
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@jimbocidman actually, wrong.
If you go to the US geological survey, by googling
USGS volcanic gases climate
you will find that humans discharge 100 times as much greenhouse gases annually as volcanoes.
We have become a geological force of nature, and are changing the atmosphere thousands of times faster than nature has over the last 55 million years. For more, see
watch?v=ZGFAWzjO378
and
watch?v=uE6at2IEUOU
greenman3610 8 months ago
@green
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@greenman360 As reguards nasty stuff in the atmospj
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@greenman360 sorry about the cut-off, phone ran out of juice. Anyways, what's with you and glen beck? You do realize he's a fruitcake? Back to ACC, it's the anthropogenic bit that had no evidence- not climate change. Earth's climate is and has always been dynamic; there are no static systems in nature. Man-made pollution is unquestionably endemic to local ecosystems, but it hasa statistically insignifigant effect on global climste- relative to natural factors.
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@jimbocidman
again, most climate deniers are fruitcakes, he's no exception.
Since you are going against the overwhelming body of research over the last 150 years, the least you might do is offer some evidence or citation for why you believe what you do.
Otherwise, you risk sounding like just another fruitcake.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman360 The scientific evidence refutes the ACC claims so clearly that it's bewildering how people give it any credence. That said I beleive ACC is a purely political/propoganda vehicle. While I beleieve that less pollution is better than more, the actions of organizations like the IPCC have destroyed any credibility the green movement had. When the predicteddisa
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@jimbocidman
yeah, it's like, crazy that the National Science academies of every country, and every relevant scientific body on the planet say this is happening, when Glenn Beck, and you, have discovered it's all wrong....
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman360 after watching more of your videos I'm starting to think you don't understand the meanings of many words: science, data, fact, falsification, theory, and so on. Passion is NOT proof. Neither is propaganda evidence. It's easy to make baseless but hysterical statements; actually learning about something is hard huh?
jimbocidman 8 months ago
@jimbocidman
then it should be easy to shoot me down. Please fire away with your citations and evidence.
Note: the voices in Glenn Beck's head are not peer reviewed.
greenman3610 8 months ago
Oh yeah, that last graph. Great source. Its the one that Mann "hid the decline"!
MWP is not a solved issue. And it is key to the panic of climate change. If it is still normal, then dont panic.
mduoba 9 months ago
@mduoba
there was no decline. and nothing was hidden. Your statement reveals you are deeply ignorant of the issue.
Stay tuned for the newest video next week, where I'll lay that out in greater detail.
greenman3610 9 months ago
@greenman3610
If nothing is 'hidden' then why do their own programs include "Censored" data? Are you saying that they didn't "HIDE" anything? That would contradict their own CRU e-mails!
Pull your head out of the sand Mr. Sinclair.
Funkyflorist 5 months ago
weird How is the MWP an act of faith when ancient people reported the findings ! weird USA people should not be allowed to comment on shit that is older than the age of the USA , they have no comprehension. I have old grape vines that no longer bear fruit but grow in my garden . I live in Aberdeenshire . My house is 1000 yrs old ..its actually a castle so greenies and yanks go f** off haha
klnine 10 months ago
@klnine Unfortunately, most Americans are ignorant of world history. That's how these alarmists were able to fool so many in blaming increased Atlantic hurricanes on global warming. If they tell Asians that global warming increases either the number or intensity of tropical cyclones, they'd be laughed at because the most prolific and intense tropical cyclone seasons were the Pacific typhoon seasons from 1950 to 1980, a time of cooler temperatures. Most Americans don't even know what a typhoon is
mrdrfez 10 months ago
@klnine
"so greenies and yanks go f** off haha"
I'll remember that the next time the Nazi's start bombing your '1000 year old home'...
So how are those elections in Germany going btw? I hear the NPD is gaining popularity...
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
The GLOBAL Medieval Warm Period. Are you honest enough to update your video? I think not.
The Medieval Warm Period - A global Phenomenon
pages. science-skeptical. de/MWP/MedievalWarmPeriod1024x768.html
Your agenda here is not to present scientific information - it is to "lie believably".
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1
stay tuned.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 The music is more effective than your words.
356pla 11 months ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 I took a look at your source and noticed several inconsistencies 1) many of the graphs didn't show the last few decades (the perioed attributed to human rather than natural primary forcings) 2) Several didn't show the last 500. 3) Several were "adapted from", why not show the original? 4) One from 1975 had obviously been altered and added to more recntly using microsoft paint?
checkyoursources 1 year ago
I am MOST intrigued by this chart of Earth's historical temperature and carbon dioxide levels. It reveals that CO2 really is not tied to temperature. It also reveals that we now live in a relative ice age compared to the historical average, and that today's CO2 levels are extremely low compared to the historical average.
Average Global Temperature and CO2 - Today's world is starved for CO2 and very cold compared to the past
geocraft. com/WVFossils/PageMill_Images/image277.gif
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1
the graph you reference comes from a West Virginia Coal mine safety engineer (I know, ironic) who basically distorts what the science says. For more complete information, see
watch?v=uE6at2IEUOU
and
watch?v=ZGFAWzjO378
As we get more information, the apparent discrepencies between co2 levels and temps have gone away, and the GHG/Temp link has just gotten stronger.
For a longer view of 4 billion years of history, google
the biggest control knob
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 I made the mistake of watching two of your videos already, then posted rebuttals showing how very wrong they were. You still haven't adjusted your MWP video to account for all the astonishing finds in Antarctica revealing its powerful effects down there, as well as beginning earlier in the southern hemisphere.
Sorry, but your videos are just plain dishonest and are therefore not learning tools. YOU are dishonest in not correcting them.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
This may be of interest to anyone who is still unsure about ice cores and AGW.
"A42D Charney Lecture
Past and Contemporary Climate Change: Evidence From Earth's Ice Cover"
It's a presentation at the recent AGU conference by E. S. Mosley-Thompson.
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources
stay tuned. I"ll be doing a video synopsis of this very soon. Good information here. Pretty much spikes the "Global MWP" myth.
greenman3610 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"there was no longer just a hockey stick but a whole hockey team"
lol brilliant...I love that statement.
Dt0x75 1 year ago
Comment removed
Dt0x75 1 year ago
Hail the Empire!!!
Long live our past Culture, Race, Pride & Class.
vMysteriousOnev1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Science News
Nasa reveals cooling sun - consequences are severe
The past month was Britain's coldest December for 120 years, meteorologists have said. The benchmark Central England Temperature plunged to an average of -0.6C over the month, the lowest figure for December since 1890, according to MeteoGroup UK, the weather forecasting division of the Press Association.
2 January 2011
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
NASA: Quiet Sun Means Cooling of Earth's Upper Atmosphere (2009)
nasa. gov/topics/earth/features/coolingthermosphere.html
No magic involved. As the upper atmosphere cools, convective cooling of the surface increases resulting in the record cold being reported in so many places now.
Once the El Nino effect wears off, this could get really bad, like the cooling period from 1945 to 1980.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1
Deniers are always trying to steal from NASA the one thing they do not have. Credibility.
For real NASA info - in context -
google
nasa key indicators
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 What's that? You deny the information NASA provided on the solar trend? It's not the first time they let us know what the sun is doing.
NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE (2003)
nasa. gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/0313irradiance.html
Interesting timing on both trends - and interesting observable results on the ground.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1
Nasa is an excellent source of information. The link you provided, however, is from 2003, and states that if a very small change in solar irradiance persisted for a century, it would affect global temps.
In the last few years, we have in fact been in the deepest solar minimum in a century, and still having the warmest years on record. So you are using good info in a dishonest, or ignorant way. Which is it?
google
nasa deep solar minimum
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 The deep solar minimum was reported about two years ago, coinciding with record cold causing bleaching of coral reefs and other not-so-amusing events. However, a great deal of ocean water was warmed during the prior warming cycle and is still circulating that warmth, temporarily offsetting the full extent of solar-forced cooling.
The resurgence of El Niño means that 2010 could yet be the hottest year on record
guardian. co. uk/uk/2010/jan/10/climate-change-uk-big-freeze
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 On the NASA 2009 article: Did you read it? "this warming has no implications for climate change in the troposphere" i.e. AGW. On the 2003 article did you read it in full? e.g. this bit: " the inferred increase of solar irradiance in 24 years, about 0.1 percent, is not enough to cause notable climate change"
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources You are somewhat distorting, through the sin of omission. What you're writing about is some guesswork about the future. Here's more:
"The research team expects the atmosphere to heat up again as solar activity starts to pick up in the next year. While this warming has no implications for climate change in the troposphere..."
Actual changes and effects remain to be seen. So, you've added pretty much nothing to our understanding with this.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Nope, I just included the bits you missed. p.s. they were referring to the upper atmosphere, not the troposphere. Have you read Lockwoods paper on this from 2010 yet?
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources I just quoted directly from the article we are discussing. They used the word troposphere. I included the bits YOU omitted. They are talking about future projections, not current observances. You left out the "expects" qualifier.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Yes they used the word troposphere preceded by "While this warming has no implications for climate change in the troposphere" meaning that the level of change in the solar output would only be significant in the troposphere (and therefore responsible for recent global warming) if maintained for 100 years! With the Sun in a current solar minimum and 2010 as the warmest year on modern record according to the WMO do you still think the Sun is the primary driver at the moment?
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources But we know WHY 2010 was, on average, as warm as 2005. It was that OTHER major contributing factor, the oceans spreading around heat energy that they had collected during earlier solar warming...
The resurgence of El Niño means that 2010 could yet be the hottest year on record
guardian. co. uk/uk/2010/jan/10/climate-change-uk-big-freeze
Yet the solar cooling can be held accountable for the record cold and precipitation in the last two years on LAND, via convective cooling.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 The analysis records the temps globally so location is irrelevant. Land temps saw more highs than lows, Only the UK and US saw significantly cold temps, the majority had warmer temps such as Africa, southern and western Asia, and the northern extremities of North America, including Greenland. We must avoid looking at individual years and look at longer periods such as the last four decades which showed consistent warming.
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources Man, you are really stuck in the last four decades, since we were recovering from the COOLING period of the previous two decades. No - you don't get to narrow it down to a time scale that only demonstrates a recovery from a cooling period. How about, let's look at the last 1200 years. Yeah, that's the ticket, start in the Medieval Warm Period.
Or, let's start in the mid-Holocene Warm Period. That's even MORE fun. My, we're a bit cold now, aren't we? Yes, we are.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 What MWP? Oh you mean the regional, non-global one, which is irrelevant to recent warming as the causes are different, you wouldn't say lightning is the only possible cause for starting a fire once matches were used so why say that the current 4 decades of change are "natural". If you play the look at irrelevant past periods game then look back 15 million years and you could say we have just ended a cooling period. Climate reacts to whatever forces it-currently its mostly us.
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources I'm referring to the global MWP that affected the world from Antarctica to Greenland, as published studies in GEOLOGY reveal. We've provided the links to those studies and their publications repeatedly - do you want to see them again? Maybe they'll sink in this time?
You play like a stuck record without learning anything new. Not very scientifically minded of you.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1
stay tuned for new video debunking MWP meme.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 You haven't given me the links (you comment so often and on so many videos so you may be mistaken about giving them to me personally so please do send them over. Mann 2009 found no global MWP- " falls well below recent levels globally", Nor did J.H. Oerlemans (2005), or Moberg et al (2005) or S. Huang (2004). The AGU conference in San Fran last year apparently had a summary also concluding that the MWP was not global (i'll look up the lecture for you if it's still there).
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources Antarctica
"ice was at or behind its present position at ca. 700-970 cal. yr B.P," implying that "the present state of reduced ice on the western Antarctic Peninsula is not unprecedented," which means that this period was at least as warm as, or likely even warmer than, the peak warmth of the Current Warm Period. (Geology 38: 635-638)
co2science. org/data/mwp/studies/l2_anversisland.php
Follow the link to see the original publication info.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@checkyoursources Sombre Lake, Signy Island, Antarctica
Primarily summer climatic conditions were inferred from a record preserved in authigenic carbonate retrieved from sediments of Sombre Lake on Signy Island, maritime Antarctica. The Medieval Warm Period (AD 1130-1215) was warmer than the Current Warm Period. (The Holocene 13: 251-263)
co2science. org/data/mwp/studies/l2_sombre.php
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@checkyoursources Amery Ice Shelf, Antarctica
Changes in the location of the edge of the Amery Ice Shelf were inferred from measurements of biogenic opal, absolute diatom abundance and the abundance of Fragilariopsis curta found in sediments retrieved from beneath the ice shelf at a point that is currently 80 km from land's edge. The MWP at ca. 750 14C yr BP was likely warmer than at any time during the CWP. (Geology 31: 127-130)
co2science. org/data/mwp/studies/l2_ameryshelf.php
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 regional?
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources Antarctica:
Climate evolution ... is inferred from the multiproxy analyses of a long (928 cm) sediment core retrieved from Maxwell Bay off King George Island. The medieval warming occurred earlier in the Southern than in the Northern Hemisphere, which might indicate that the warming was driven by processes occurring in the south. (Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 2010; v. 344; p. 243-260;)
sp. lyellcollection. org/cgi/content/abstract/344/1/243
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Where does this say it was warmer than current conditions?
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources I have presented you with several very recent studies, published in GEOLOGY and elsewhere, indicating that Antarctica was warmer than today and that the warming started there earlier than it did in the northern hemisphere. If you wish to learn more, follow the links.
These studies are helping to answer the question as to whether the MWP was limited to a region in northern Europe and Greenland. The answer is NO. Further supported by the global chart I provided.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@checkyoursources The Medieval Warm Period - a Global Phenomenon
pages. science-skeptical. de/MWP/MedievalWarmPeriod1024x768.html
The key to it all is this: It affected the Northern and Southern Hemispheres and affected Antarctica far more than the current warming period. Evidence of it is found on all continents when one looks at the right indicators.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Where does this say it was warmer than current conditions?
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources Finally, it seems clear that Mann is a fraud and determined to thwart honest peer review of his work. This is an interesting read from one of his peers who attempted to show Mann where he was wrong.
Michael Mann - erroneous methodologies, silencing the peer review
h t t ps: //public. me. com/ix/williseschenbach/Svalbard.pdf
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Yet again you clog the comments section. Please limit your comments to one at a time. Please refer to this on the MWP: It summarises all the recent work by a variety of people: A42D Charney Lecture Past and Contemporary Climate Change: Evidence From Earth's Ice Cover"
It's a presentation at the recent AGU conference by E. S. Mosley-Thompson.
You do appreciate that past climate changes are not caused by the same factor as current ones? i.e. my match and lightning example.
checkyoursources 1 year ago
@checkyoursources You ASKED me to provide the links. Don't complain when I do. I said "links". That's plural. I provided them with brief abstracts to ensure you would see some of the conclusions of the studies involved, namely that the MWP began earlier in the southern hemisphere, had a much greater effect on Antarctica than today's warming period and the global chart shows how it affected ALL continents.
You now have some "links" - plural - to help adjust your worldview to fit the facts.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
green
TheMaximumoverload 1 year ago
Stop living in the past . The earth has now entered a cooling cycle. Do some relevent research.
david222444 1 year ago
@david222444
Since all datasets show warming, you must have some kind of magical psychic information - by all means share.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@david222444
Just thought it might be a good idea to take stock being 31 December and all. What year was the hottest since instrumental records began? 2010 I think, so if that means we are entering a cooling cycle, David, could I have your tips for the Dow next year please?
As for the freeze in the northern hemisphere; consistent with a slowing gulf stream.
The floods in northern Australia at the moment and the bushfires two years ago in southern Australia; consistent with model predictions.
richlest 1 year ago
@richlest
I blogged on this the other day. google
White Christmas in Southeast. Heatwave in Hudson Bay.
and
Global Warming. It’s just that. Global. Ask Bill Nye.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 Hey everyone! watch Bill Nye get slaughtered by Richard Lindzen on Larry King> Bill Nye is a know nothing,, as bad as greenman, just as dishonest....he got eaten alive.
pointyhead1 1 year ago
@pointyhead1 "Science by debate". Hey, just like the good ol' days when churches, or dictators could "prove the science" by having a louder voice. Try looking up the church proving over Galileo (he had actual data, climate denier blogo-scientists have to make up their own or "cherry pick"), and Lamarck (promoted in the Soviet Union). "Winning a debate" is easy. Hey, Hitler was a great speaker and "won the debate" in Germany, was he right? Lucky real science does not work like that. Data wins
indulis1 1 year ago
@indulis1
I have no idea why your post is addressed to me.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I raised the subject of "Ask Bill Nye".
He hasn't written any papers on Climate Science, even indirectly ( in a field connected to Climate) that I know of. No science to look at.
Therefore before buying into "Ask Bill Nye", one might ask "What about Bill?"
What has he to offer ?
Take a look. Bill Nye, Richard Lindzen on Larry King. Youtube.
pointyhead1 1 year ago
@pointyhead1 Yeah all Bill Nye has got to offer is the published science (thousands of real scientific papers) by actual climatologists- corroborated by atmospheric physicists and actual satellite observations, whereas Lindzen has his opinions- talking outside his area of expertise, with no published papers to support him. Yeah, go for Lindzen and wait for the planet to get so stuffed up that we all suffer. Just so we can continue to burn up fossil fuels at massive, increasing rates.
indulis1 1 year ago
@indulis1
But I thought you objected to notions of "science by debate" That's what you addressed to me as your seeming complaint, it seemed.
When I point out that the subject of "Ask Bill Nye" was was raised by another, and that there is a reason to see what Bill has to offer, then you seem to want to argue that Bill has something to offer on Climate and Lindzen does not.
That is fine, but it's not what you were complaining about. Is it ?
That's fine,
pointyhead1 1 year ago
@indulis1 Are you sure that YOU want to claim that Blll Nye has all this science to his name ? Or that he can access it just the same as you or tI can ?
whereas, I am led to believe that you are unaware that Lindzen is both soft spoken, and has "IPCC Lead Author" under HIS belt,
oh, Baby ! Outa the ballpark.
thanks for that.
pointyhead1 1 year ago
indulis, I thought someone might claim such a debate was not fair, because Lindzen is a scientist, but Bill Nye is a only a TV personality.
But you made me laugh so hard I thought I'd share my enjoyment. You, though, like, right out of the blue, just say that Bill Nye is a heavier weight than Richard Lindzen !
Surprise me again sometime with something so wonderful, won't you ?
pointyhead1 1 year ago
I would like to thank Greenman for giving us this opportunity to explain just how incorrect the AGW Faithful, the "flat-earthers" who cannot grasp environmental science, who have no grasp of the extent of the Medieval Climate Optimum, really are.
Have a nice day!
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1
My pleasure.
I get so much more than I give.
greenman3610 1 year ago
If there's any greenhouse gas map on the world that correlates with warming and cooling trends, it's not a map of CO2. It's a map of methane which shows highest levels in the Arctic and lowest levels in the Antarctic. Greenman doesn't mention methane much because he drank the carbonated (CO2) Kool-Aid!
mrdrfez 1 year ago
I challenge Greenman to explain why some of the areas that are warming up the most (i.e. the Arctic) have the lowest concentrations of CO2 on earth. I have an explanation that does not necessarily disproves CO2 as a greenhouse gas, but I don't think Greenman can.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
"Simply laying out the facts won’t work."- Al Gore
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@mrdrfez
Obviously not in your case.
He nailed that one.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 He nailed that one? Ummm... NO! Even Al Gore later admitted that his model was oversimplified and now he's stating that methane and soot played a larger role than previously thought. And no, you can't shoot that climate denier rants on me because I'm not one. I'm just saying that his claims have been exaggerated and have been rebuked by other scientists (the "consensus" scientists and NOT the fringe "big oil" ones)
mrdrfez 1 year ago
Well, we know mankind contributes a paltry 0.28% to the atmosphere's heat-catching ability. However, we also know there's not enough CO2 in the atmosphere to "cause" global warming - it is solar driven. The drastic cooling spell from 1945 to about 1980 occurred even as industry pumped CO2 into the atmosphere. At 0.038% of total atmospheric content, it has very little temperature effect.
It does, however, cause the plants to grow better.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 I can not agree with your exact numbers on mankind's contribution to warming, but I do agree completely with you on that these sensationalist projections have more holes than Swiss Cheese and Jenna Jameson put together! They can't explain the post WWII cooling. They blame the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season on global warming, yet they cannot explain why the most active recorded Pacific typhoon years happened during years of global cooling not warming.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@mrdrfez "I can not agree with your exact numbers on mankind's contribution to warming"
You might find this study of atmospheric gases informative:
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
geocraft. com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
The folks holding these big "redistribute the wealth" meetings in places like Cancun are not interested in the science. They're done paying lip service to it and are simply figuring out how much to take, who gets it and when. Scientific truth will not stop them.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Yes, I have long known that water vapor is the biggest greenhouse gas. However, reports on the exact numerical value of water vapor and CO2 vary greatly without even taking that one into the equation. These alarmists have shot themselves in the foot repeatedly. By consistently pushing doomsday scenarios based on hypothetical extremes that have been contradicted by science, they have destroyed their own credibility
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@mrdrfez
water vapor crock
watch?v=LAtD9aZYXAs
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 Yes, but I have asked you to explain 9% to 26% variation in greenhouse contribution of CO2. And no, that data wasn't from some fringe climate denier site.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@mrdrfez
the reason numbers vary as to co2's contribution, or any gas's contribution, is that the various molecules absorb over a range of frequencies, and these freqencies are not neatly boxed in, like a denialist's mind.
They overlap. There are gray areas.
So there is a range given when estimates are made.
It's science. We have gray areas and error bars.
for more exact numbers, see recent peer reviewed paper, google
Atmospheric CO2: Principal Control Knob Governing Earth’s Temperature
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 Now, here you go shooting off insults accusing people of being denialists. Are you a climate scientist? The existence of such a wide range of grey areas means that further research needs to be conducted before we can come up with an accurate climate model. All you do is end everything with: "polar ice caps melting, and sea level rising" Yes, I know that. Unless you can give more thorough explanation instead of just the same positive correlation rant, we can't believe you.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@greenman3610 If CO2 is the principal "knob", why could it not stop the centuries-long Ice Age after the Medieval Climate Optimum? Why could it not stop the rather deadly, decades-long cooling in the first half of last century? Why, as that Sahara example demonstrated, can it not trap heat from escaping the Earth even for a few hours?
Why can it not stop each and every Ice Age that begins when CO2 has reached its maximum due to warming?
Bad propaganda there, sonny.
GunTrainers 1 year ago
@greenman3610 The claim is bunk - it is Earth's oceans and water heat transfer systems that retain the sun's heat, not CO2.
That Sahara Desert example is a good illustration, when compared to the Amazon Jungle. The CO2 can not trap heat but water vapor does it very effectively.
GunTrainers 1 year ago
@greenman3610 His video is a crock.
The Sahara Desert goes from 120 degrees in the daytime to BELOW FREEZING at night in the Summer because CO2 cannot trap heat even for a few hours. It is insignificant in the heat-trapping picture. All that heat just pisses off into space.
The Amazon remains warm all night long. Water vapor is the difference.
His ignorance and willful deception are profound.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 Methane which has went up 230% from pre-industrial levels is deemed at least 21 times more potent than CO2. Yet Greenman and the other alarmists keep singling out CO2 as the culprit without looking much at methane. Why? Because Al Gore told them to. It's really suspect how Al Gore and the rest ignored a much more dangerous gas so perhaps they did have something to profit from eliminating CO2.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@mrdrfez Yep - CO2 became their focus not because it is any great threat but because it can be easily taxed.
It is the mechanism by which the Globalist Communists will control the world economy. They left the USSR and went on to a much bigger game.
Communism - State Control of the Means of Production and the Distribution of Wealth
IPCC Official Ottmar Edenhofer: World climate summit, Cancun, is actually about distribution of the world's resources
BOHICA!!
GunTrainers 1 year ago
@GunTrainers
having failed to sap our precious bodily fluids with their satanic fluoride, the commies are back.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@GunTrainers Methane's average life in the atmosphere lasts around 10 to 12 years which is much shorter than CO2. This means that a drastic reduction in methane would have much quicker effects on the climate than reducing CO2 emissions. Why wouldn't they want to do more research on methane reduction? Something fishy is going on.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@mrdrfez I notice the alarmist posts by Nightversionn and others constantly say something horrible "could" happen or "may" happen, without indicating it is "likely" to happen. Of course, that's the same strategy they employed in the 1970s, warning us glaciers "could" return to crush New York and 70% of animal life "could" be extinct by the year 2000.
Despite being consistently wrong, they push forward with their schemes to steal our money. That is the real goal.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
And for the record, I do believe that manmade global warming is real, and I do not listen to Rush Limbaugh. I also believe that we need to lower greenhouse gas emissions. However, that does NOT mean that I'm going to drink the Kool-Aid by accepting everything that Al Gore and other sensationalist charlatans say.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@mrdrfez
you should probably listen to Rush Limbaugh.
I bet you'd like him.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 There... I have thrown data at you that you cannot explain or post as crocks, and I have debunked some of your crocks, and now you're calling me names. Oh yes, I question your positions and your knowledge so therefore I must be a climate denier, big oil backer, and Holocaust denier.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
What is mankind's contribution to the atmospheric heat-catching potential? About 0.28%
How long has this warming period gone on? Over ten thousand years.
How far have the oceans risen? Over 400 feet, most of it before 6,000 years ago as the initial warming spike was quite severe.
How far have the glaciers retreated? Over 2000 miles, exposing billions of acres of new farmland and habitat for wildlife.
Life loves a greenhouse, not a glacier.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
Corruption in the realm of "mainstream" science is driven by those holding the purse strings.
Hal Lewis: My Resignation From The American Physical Society
Climate Science completely corrupted by money from joining the "warming" scam
thegwpf. org/ipcc-news/1670-hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society.html
George Soros Leadership Position in American Physical Society
aps. org/publications/apsnews/199708/soros.cfm
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
The ice, says Magnusson, has retreated by almost 100 meters (328 feet) since he began raising reindeer more than 10 years ago. "Every meter means more pasture for my animals," says Magnusson, "and each additional day they're able to graze on a green pasture adds half a pound to their weight."
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
Large sections of the northern hemisphere enjoyed a period of unusually mild weather at the time. Climate models based on data from ice cores show that temperatures plunged quite abruptly in the 14th century, triggering a minor ice age and probably driving the Vikings from Greenland. The last known records document a wedding in the church of Hvalsøy on Sept. 16, 1408. Today, all that remains of the Vikings' rural life on Greenland are the foundations of their houses.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
Maybe you don't like the facts about Greenland but...
Known for its massive ice sheets, Greenland is feeling the effects of global warming as rising temperatures have expanded the island's growing season and crops are flourishing. For the first time in hundreds of years, it has become possible to raise cattle and start dairy farms.
Got that? The mini-Ice Age, from which we are just recovering, put a temporary end to those farms. Well, they're coming back!
Deniers... deny this. LOL!!
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1 History has shown that there was a lot more famine and warfare during cold periods than warm periods. Also, the most active year for Pacific typhoons on record was 1964 (39 storms) which was a relatively cool period. Alarmists would dismiss this as a mere anomaly but would like to say that the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season was due to global warming.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@AmericaSpeakOut1
google
nasa Global Warming Reduces Plant Productivity
greenman3610 1 year ago
A great deal of new information from scientific studies of Antarctica reveals that the Medieval Warm Period was not just isolated to a small area of the Northern Hemisphere - it even drove Antarctica to warmer temperatures than today. Scientists publishing in Geology Magazine have been studying the effects of the MWP on Antarctica, finding that the ice melt was more significant then than it is today, among other indicators.
AmericaSpeakOut1 1 year ago