The whole story is right now 120 Comments long. This is a comment thread between me and a PhD in astrophysics. Google his book "The Many Faces of the Sun."
You cite a few local weather extremes, meanwhile other parts of the globe are suffering heat waves. You forget to mention those. While it was unusually cold in the eastern US, western Europe, and Australia, the climate was setting record temperatures in Canada, Greenland, Russia, Asia, Africa. Check it out at the NOAA NCDC website - climate monitoring - look at the monthly maps global temperature maps - a sea of large red dots warmer than average with a few blue dots cooler than average
@drkstrong From Alaska to Las Vegas to Florida to New York and then to England and all over two year period, I think that’s an area of about 50,000 square miles. Hardly local! .
@drkstrong More red dots then blue. Wow, did you go to climate school in England too. Temperatures fluctuate constantly all throughout history. That is a Fact. There is no way to prove which factor is or is not having an effect on the climate. That’s the problem. My point is, unless you have some kind of proof one way or the other, shut up.
@AlaskaFreeman "temperatures fluctuate constantly all throw-out history": TRUE ." There is no way to prove which factor is or is not having an effect on the climate" UNTRUE. Each factor has a specific finger print (Sun, CRs, GHGs, Ocean currents, Oscillations) you can match the nature of the warming with the fingerprint and eliminate everything except GHGs or th ebulk of the warming in the last 50 years - even the most sceptical climatologists agree on that.
@drkstrong There is no science formula out there that can prove for a fact what future temperatures are going to be. There are also, a million deferent variables that could be making the world hotter and there is a million-billion deferent factors that could be making the world colder.
@AlaskaFreeman Global temperatures change for a variety of reasons - local temperatures change for even more reasons. You are talking about 1 place at one time - I am talking about 85% of the worlds glaciers are retreating - that does not leave the deniers much wiggle room does it?
@AlaskaFreeman According to NOAA NCDC for November 2010 (latest data available) the % of the US that was classified as very cold or record cold (i.e. well below average temperature) was only 0.63% - about 20,000 sq miles. leaving the other 3.3M sq miles to be average. Whereas the average classified as very warm for the year so far has been about 20% area which is equivalent to about 700,000 sq miles (data from NOAA NCDC - climate monitoring - state of the climate - national overview - areas).
Again me From Alaska to Las Vegas to Florida to New York and then to England and all over two year period, I think that’s an area of about 50,000 square miles. Hardly local!
@drkstrong I want the earth to be warmer, the hotter the better. YOU CAN’T GROW FOOD IN THE COLD AND HOTTER WEATHER MAKES FOR MORE RAIN. THAT IS ALSO A FACT.
@drkstrong You are sick. Unless you have Proof like 1+1=2, proof, which you don’t according to the Climate-Gate Emails, STOP KILLING THE WORLDS PEOPLE!
@AlaskaFreeman SIGH! You cannot prove a theory only disprove it. At the moment AGW is the only theory that fits all the facts. You make stuff up and its insulting. It shows how unreasoning you have become. The scientists are trying to stop people from dying - GW could kill millions or even billions (if it precipitates wars as the Pentagon fears). It is already tens of thousands due to droughts, heat waves, huge storms, ..... get real, mate
@drkstrong What have I made up. Tens of thousands more people die from smoking in America in a year. I don't see you trying to stop that. Billions of PEOPLE CANT EAT.
@drkstrong And now they are growing again. But now according your fake Climate-Gate science we all have to pay more for fuel to stop the warming. Did you know that people from around the world are starving because of the inflationary back lashes of your fake science. How do you sleep at night knowing that Americans are driving round on corn, (because of people like you) when people are starving in Africa and Mexico because corn prices have gone through the roof.
@AlaskaFreeman I attended a climate conference about 6 years ago where the only thing everyone could agree on was that corn-based ethonol was a very bad idea. The politicians egged on by the farm lobby (higher prices) and oil companies (subsidies) pushed the idea and nobody was listening to the experts.
@drkstrong Sure, just like a scientist to take action on a “theory” that pushes politicians to action that kills millions of people then say, oh well it’s not my fault but, tens of thousands may or may not have die from a storm that may or may not have been a result of Global warming.
GOOGLE: BUSH: USE ETHANOL TO GET OFF OIL, BUSH CALLS FOR ENERGY INDEPENDENCE, STANDS BY ETHANOL ALTHOUGH ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF THE CORN-BASED FUEL ARE QUESTIONED WHILE IT IS BLAMED FOR SURGING FOOD PRICES.
GOOGLE: OBAMA DOOMED TO REPEAT BUSH'S ETHANOL MISTAKES?
@AlaskaFreeman The politicians dont need to be pushed - they make any change their opportunity to push their policies or rather the policies of the big corporations dictated to them. The answer to the cold war was a missile defense system, the solution to 9/11 wasa missile defence system, the solution to Iraq was a missile defense system, the answer to Iran was the same.
@drkstrong Here you go again, stay on topic; I'm again talking about something that in reality happened. Politicians sell congressional votes for money (for reelection) to companies and special interest groups the first half of their term. And then they sell their congressional votes to the public during the last part of their term so that they can get back in to office.
@AlaskaFreeman Here we agree - the US political system is corrupt. I was staying on the subject of political influence which has a significant bearing on this whole thing. Did you look at my video "Snowstorms disprove global warming theory"? VXDJLcdv0jk - here I am talking about stuff that is real
@drkstrong According to Captain Cook’s writings, at the turn of the 19 century, the Glaciers her in Alaska had receded over 40 miles in-between his two visits. There were very few if at all cars in the world at the time. How do you explain that? The Fact is the world warms and cools whether there are a billion cars on the road or not. Fact: Glaciers around the world have been melting for hundreds of years.
@AlaskaFreeman Odd that every expert on glaciers says the reverse. You have a source that none of the experts seems to be aware of - prehaps because it is a fiction or perhaps they dont pay attention to Fox news or the blogosphere.
@drkstrong No, all the Glaciers in the world have been melting for century’s, Chile, Montana, Alaska and Canada. All have been melting for hundreds of years. Well before cars or industry, look at the photos, study the personal reports (of Captain Cook's journey to Alaska) , &^%$ read something historical about weather.
@drkstrong You know you are a DoucheBag, you keep discounting my facts by pointing out that you think some expert would disagree with me. Look, I can do it too. The creator of the weather channel does not believe in Global warming, and he wants to sue Al Gore for his movie. And you are a DumAss piece of @#^$ compared to him, so you must be wrong about everything that you are saying on the matter. You see how easy it is?
@AlaskaFreeman You dont have any facts at all, you have rumors & mysinformation. E.g., "the creator of weather channel does not believe in Global warming, and he want(s) to sue Gore for his movie" You mean John Coleman - he did not found the weather channel (that was Batten), he was appointed CEO until he was fired after just a year. He is a TV weatherman without a single scientific qualification to his name - he has a BA in journalism (same as Al Gore!). Dont believe me - do some research.
@drkstrong Your a joke. Well then in your own words Doushebag. "John Coleman a Former TV weatherman, Former CEO of the weather channel ( the current authority in weather news) and possessor of a BA in journalism (same as Al Gore), does not believe in Global warming, and along with 30,000 other scientists are going to sue Gore for his movie. If you would like, I will print all the names of the scientist’s and then you could try to discredit each one individually..
@AlaskaFreeman I see you conveniently skip over the fact that he has NO SCIENTIFIC QUALIFICATIONS WHATSOEVER. "The I am going to sue Al Gore" was a publicity stunt by Coleman about 3 years ago - he never brought any such suit. "Along with 30,000 scientists" is a lie - here you are referring to the Oregon Petition signers (most of whom are not research scientists - check a sample of the names on the web - and only one climatologist) which had nothing to do with signing up for a law suit.
@drkstrong Who would you believe, some so-called expert or your own eyes. Look at the photos of Glaciers from 1900 and older and then look at the photos of those same Glaciers today. The same Glaciers get bigger and bigger the later you go. Look, don’t say anything more until you do some research. You can’t simply write-off fact because some expert told you so. You are a Sheep baaaaaaa.
@AlaskaFreeman When you are sick you go to a doctor. A law problem you go to a lawyer. When you worry about the climate you go to a climatologist. Yes a few glaciers are getting longer for very well known reasons - in some cases because the sea ice shelf in front of them which acts as a dam has collapsed or in others because there has more precipitation at high altitudes (a GW prediction) & because melt water is seeping to the base so speeding their flow. But most are stinking - faster & faster.
@drkstrong According to GW theory, it is impossible to have any glacier buildup anywhere; it is unfeasible to have record lows temperatures anywhere in the world. Fact: (At an actual greenhouse) Once a greenhouse is full to capacity of Co2, (provided the sun is hitting the greenhouse) the temperatures in the greenhouse don't get colder they get hotter. There are not pockets of extremely cold air anywhere in the greenhouse, it just really fu@&ing hot everywhere. .
@AlaskaFreeman You make an assertion about the theory that is not true so the rest of you conclusions are faulty. The total effect of AGW is only 1 F so far. That is a fraction of the day to day - week to week and year to year natural variability. So if you have a low temperature record that would have beaten the old one by say 5F then now days it would only beat it by 4F. We will have to wait for decades before the effect is large enough to prevent new low temperature records.
@drkstrong Dude that is not what Al Gore is saying in this video. He is not suggesting one degree or a possible 2 degree change in the space of a few decades. He is suggesting we are all going to be cooking in hell inside of the next decade. You need a little more of the punch. Watch my video again.
@AlaskaFreeman You think the ice caps are growing? Sorry wrong again. See video: Global Warming Answers 4 - jG9PdMlP63c. Two completely indendent measurements give the same answer - they are shrinking at an alarming rate.
@drkstrong YouTube: Global Warming: 2007 Winter is Cold
"Never before in the history of a research project dating back to 1946 had the Icefields witnessed the kind of snow buildup" - U.S. Geological Survey glaciologist Bruce Molnia 2008
@drkstrong No, he did say that at some kind of speech or interview. So now, we live in DumbAssland, where Al Gore only says what you want him to say, is that right.
@drkstrong You are proving my point for me. According to GW theory, the more Co2 injected in to the atmosphere the hotter the atmosphere well get (exactly like a green house dues), and like a greenhouse, temperatures in a will not drop until CO2 levels fall. CO2 level in the atmosphere are higher than ever in history and Co2 are increasing at an ever-expanding rate (with china and India growing economies).
@AlaskaFreeman "more Co2 injected in to the atmosphere the hotter the atmosphere well get" true(ish) - it is not the atmosphere that gets hot & heats everything else but the land and oceans that absorb the back scattered IR that in turn heat the atmosphere. The rest is wrong - you make the incorrect assumption that other larger but short-term factors dont come into play. They do - El Nino / La Nina for example.
@drkstrong So are you know saying Al Gore is wrong. Yes, now we are getting somewhere. Well I learned about greenhouse gases in grade school and if my information is inaccurate I invite you to pick up any grade school science book and read it for yourself. You make my point again, thank you, El Nino and LaNina are the only provable model the world truly has, and are exactly the one and only reasons why we are have weather extremes on the westcost of the America’s , both hotter and colder.
@drkstrong Basically I’m trying to say your data is flawed, that makes your science flawed. It’s been corrupted by too many outside influences, El Nino and LaNina and the typical temperature cycles are all factors that could easily explain the worlds current weather extremes.
@AlaskaFreeman The IPCC projects take several scenarios into account - 0 increase in GHGs, all the way to an accelerating contribution. I have read the climategate emails (including the string of emails) not just selected phrases. her is nothing there about the globe getting colder. Because again if you look at my Global Warming Answers Video 2 & 3 you will that it is not.
Huffington Post: Climate-Gate Emails Kevin Trenberth-University of East Anglia, said, "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." was referring to that there was an "incomplete explanation" of the short-term variability of temperatures.
@AlaskaFreeman Prove the data is flawed. The raw data, analysis, and methods are all available (NCDC) and none of the sceptical scientists have found any problems with it. Yet you know there is - remarkable that you have found something that nobody else has seen.
@drkstrong I’m talking about the GW models projections, not the raw data. Hell, even some of the raw data say it's getting colder. Look at the Climate-Gate emails which I have. If you want me to print those, I can. The GW model projections also do not take in to consideration technological advances and emission-deduction technologies like clean coal and mini nuke plants.
@drkstrong Fact is I’m going to be right no matter what I say. Global Warming is not real, un-provable and only a Dumass like this guy believe in it. And we well have to wait and see who is right.
@drkstrong You know the world’s oil supply is past its peak that means, for a fact, there is only so much oil left in the world. An automatic decline in Co2 emissions is emanate, no matter what happens with the climate. And with the advent of hydrogen cars over the next ten years and rising oil prices, you will never be able to prove your theory anyways. Do you realize that, you are wasting your time?
@drkstrong It’s much more likely they will go with the Mitsubishi mini nuke plants (current tech) for their power needed to fill the hydrogen mini gas plaints (current tech and online). It’s way cheaper and it’s cleaner. No one like’s smoggy air. Did you also forget about the millions of windmills that are going up? Nope, you know nothing about economics or new technology.
@drkstrong Do you really think we are going to be burning coal 50 years from now? Why would we? There is not going to be a market for it. Stop lying to yourself.
@drkstrong OOO no no no no. We both know that’s not true. Did you forget about green energy. They currently have solar photo cells that put out 3x current technology and its paper thin too, they say you will be able to line your car and home with it soon.
@AlaskaFreeman I hope that is true but the last time I checked those were goals and the actual technology was falling far short of that. I had understood that the cheap thin ones were less efficent. I attended a seminar on solar cells for spacecarft power systems a couple of years ago and that seemed to be their conclusion - perhaps things have moved on since then.
@AlaskaFreeman I would have no problem with that technology but the coal, oil, and gas, The problem is that some idiots are wanting to mine methane hydrates from the depths of the oceans - if that becomes unstable and starts to melt we are infor a very rough time.
@AlaskaFreeman No, not the bottom of the ocean the hydrate deposits. They are frozen below a critical level of the ocean as the oceans warm they could become unstable and puch huge amounts of methane intothe atmosphere - methane is a much more effective GHG than CO2 fortuneately its concentration is currently low and its life time inthe atmosphere is short compared to CO2 (years not decades/centuries) but unfortunately it turns into CO2 (and water vapour)
@drkstrong I know all this already. There are like a million methane producing lakes in Alaska and I don’t hear you whining about that. I don’t care, GW is not real or provable and I don’t care about Green House Gases that don’t pollute. If GW was real I would be all for it, growing food is good more ice and snow are bad. A green planet is good, a cold earth is bad.
@drkstrong Don’t you mean, where you think the demonstratable effects are according to your theory, let’s not stray too far from reality, and everyone knows warm weather makes for more rain. Heat evaporates ocean water which makes for more rain. Like hurricanes ( I know there is more to a hurricane like water temp, air temps, air currents, ext.) it's just a simple but, big example .
@drkstrong Are you now saying that GW is going to evaporate all the clouds in the sky. Sh&* we are all going to die. Are you also now saying if we don’t stop GW "Heat waves and droughts" are going to encompass the entire world and that the ocean waters of the world are going to stop evaporating and producing rain. Wow this is a brake-threw. We are all going to die! Al Gore help us all!
@drkstrong Watch TV, I have seen all these technologies work. On channels like PBS, Travel Channel and the Discovery channel. Hell, the military have cars that drive them self's now, they also have robots with big ass guns on them and that's only today. And that's now, what do you think they well have ten years from now?
@drkstrong LOOK I TOLD YOU, YOU CAN’T PROVE ANYTHING YOU’RE SAYING, NOT FOR AT LEAST 20 YEARS AND BY THEN CO2 WILL NO LONGER BE A PROBLEM. OIL IS RUNNING OUT AND "selected phrases" MEAN A LOT WHEN YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT .08 CHANGES IN CLIMATE. RIGHT! RIGHT!
@AlaskaFreeman Source please. Now a lot of deniers say that he said that but I have never found a reliable quote on it. It certainly is in in neither of his books or movie.
@drkstrong FOX NEWS, call them. Get their source on Gore's Comments. Then call the source and verify and then print it. That’s called News, that's how it's done. Then you can say I’m wrong if it does not check out, otherwise you are a liar.
@AlaskaFreeman Gore is merely reporting what the scientists say - nor do I recall saying he is wrong. Actually I showed in my video - Global Warming Answers 2 & 3: Ai6ju28nAyk - that when you remove the effects of El Nino / La Nina there is a distinct and very significant warming trend over the last 10-15 years.
@drkstrong Deniers interesting, you can’t even prove GW is real. To called someone a denier there has to be something provable to deny. It’s a theory not a Fact, as you have said yourself in the past. There is no such thing as a denier of fiction. The proper word is skeptic. Liberal’s use that kind of terminology, are you a liberal? Because liberal’s are the true deniers, deniers of reality…hahahahah
@drkstrong Right that one degree you where talking about earlier, sure, sure. One degree is such a small amount, it literally is the margin of error, no matter how solid you think your science is, you’re a joke, and you know what you can do. Take your one degree in climate change and shove it up your margin of error. No scientist with any brains would back a “theory” that fell within the smallest margin possible. I mean your margin has to be something right? What it is it half a degree?
@AlaskaFreeman No 1 degree is not the margin of error on a 1 degree signal - it is about 0.2 (20%) and that could go either way - you cant reserve the lower margin of error and make thta the norm. So 1.2F is as likely to be correct as 0.8F ?
@drkstrong 0.2 is your margin of error, why not .1 or even .001. Hahaha….So what you are now saying is, 100 years of Co2 injections has possible produced .08 change in the climate as a whole. Bull. It's a fraction of a degree and your calling that science. You are saying, you can personally subtract all other none Co2 variables from this model. A model (which involves the fluidity of the weather,) and then the produced number is a fraction and you are still going to stand by that?
@drkstrong Statistics nope never took it. But I do know how to analyze the results and I was told by a statistics teacher, you can statistically prove anything you want. Ask a teacher, that’s the first thing they teach you in class.
@AlaskaFreeman Not a very good teacher because that is absolutely untrue. You can use statistics to test whether something is true or not and how likely it is. Read up about it and see for yourself then tell your teacher that they are full of it.
@drkstrong "How likely it is" is not the same as true. Fu*# pick up a dictionary sometime. Stop making definitions up; a branch of applied mathematics concerned with the collection and interpretation of quantitative data and the use of probability “theory” to estimate population parameters. I don’t see the word TRUE or the word FACT or even the word UNTRUE in that statment.
@drkstrong This is between you and me and you are full of sh&#. If you don’t believe statistics can be skewed when one considers the sample group or data collector. Take a poll for example. They are wrong all the time.
@AlaskaFreeman Now where did I say that statistics cannot be misued? There are several different books on the issue - I was given one for Xmas about 5 years ago which I can highly recommend. I'll feret it out and let you know what it is called.
@AlaskaFreeman There are levels of certainty. The criterion in science for true in statistics is 3 sigma - 98.5% probable. If you are dealing with mesurements of a quantity you can never be 100% certain - it is to do with the uncertainty principle & probability theory. The chicken & eggs problem - you pick up 6 eggs from the chicken coup how ceratin are you that you have all chicken eggs laid? Did you miss 1? Did you miscount as you put them in the basket? Did the fox steal one? Is 1 a duck egg?
@AlaskaFreeman I think you are losing it - time to calm down. TV, for the most part, is not real (including many of the news channels). Dont base your conclusions on infotainment and sensational journalists who are english majors who have never cracked a science book in their lives. I had to explain what helium was to a "science writer" for a major media outlet when he interviewed me. He eventually admitted he had only taken the job as science writer because he wanted to xfer to sports ASAP.
@drkstrong I’m a journalist, I work for a TV station, I’m not a writer of course because of my dyslexia, but I have done radio, and internet stories. And I would have to agree with you on that fact the Liberal media is full of sh#@, and that most news is bias because of the reporters. But, the media (of course it is totally legal for them to lie) don't lie about hard facts (because lying is a career ender), how they spin that same fact is another story. See Dan Rather or Keith Olbermann
@AlaskaFreeman "Liberal media" a bit of a give a way on your bias. Every time I have voted I have voted for a conservative some of us conservatives still have a firm grasp on reality.
@drkstrong Well conservative or not, there is nothing conservative about killing people for an unproven theory. There is only right v. wrong in my mind.
@AlaskaFreeman The only peopel who will end up killing people are those that are trying to prevent action against globalwarming. I assume you have read the Pentagon report on the issue, if not look it up. It does not make for comfortable reading.
@AlaskaFreeman You think Fox News does any of that. They admit to being infotainment and even went to court and argued that they had no obligation to tell the truth as a news channel. Google "Fox News gets okay to misinform public"
@drkstrong Just like CNN, MSNBC, and every newspaper in the world. So what’s your problem it’s Constitutional for newspapers to lie. Freedom of the press, you really need to pick up a book sometime.
@drkstrong Look I’m not making any of this up, lying is stupid. Anybody can lie. It’s when you have a true insight in to a topic that makes one’s words valuable. When will you lib's learn that. I have either read or learned or saw everything I have said on this blog, you can ether look it up or not. It does not matter to me. I have no reason to lie, I’m just a nobody from Alaska who happens to know little something about everything.
@drkstrong (You want sources, let's get started then. I will find you the sources you have been asking for. I will find you) real climatologist from real university saying exactly what I have been telling you almost verbatim.
This other guy is wrong and stupid. Even though I’m not the best freestyle writer, I’m the only genius in the House. The deferent’s you may ask, well god gives it to some of us, but not to all of us. I’m done. You my friend can take up your theory of Global warming with these other guys. Why you ask? Because I’m just the guy who is as smart as a climatologist, astrophysicist, four university professors and a climate researcher. I’m not really one.
@drkstrong - DR. DAVID LEGATES-CENTER OF CLIMATIC RESEARCH- UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE - JORGEN PEDER STEFFENSEN, CURATOR FOR NIELS BOHR INSTITUTE, DEPARTMENT OF GEOPHYSICS - DR. JOHN CHRISTY UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA IN HUNTSVILLE- DR. NILS-AXEL MORNER – STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY -DR.SALLIE BALIUNAS, ASTROPHYSICIST HARVARD UNIVERSITY - MARKETING PROFESSOR SCOTT ARMSTRONG OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA'S –ASTROPHYSICIST AND METEOROLOGIST PIERS CORBYN
@drkstrong And I’m not a scientist; I’m an internet and radio talk show producer. MY BRAIN IS IN TUNE WITH GENIUSES FROM AROUND THE WORLD. I’m watching these videos right now and I’m %@#*ing myself. (Inference) all this (over the last few days) I was so right it’s scary. I took fact made statements that supported those realities and according to these sources I was right.
The whole story is right now 120 Comments long. This is a comment thread between me and a PhD in astrophysics. Google his book "The Many Faces of the Sun."
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
You cite a few local weather extremes, meanwhile other parts of the globe are suffering heat waves. You forget to mention those. While it was unusually cold in the eastern US, western Europe, and Australia, the climate was setting record temperatures in Canada, Greenland, Russia, Asia, Africa. Check it out at the NOAA NCDC website - climate monitoring - look at the monthly maps global temperature maps - a sea of large red dots warmer than average with a few blue dots cooler than average
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong From Alaska to Las Vegas to Florida to New York and then to England and all over two year period, I think that’s an area of about 50,000 square miles. Hardly local! .
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong More red dots then blue. Wow, did you go to climate school in England too. Temperatures fluctuate constantly all throughout history. That is a Fact. There is no way to prove which factor is or is not having an effect on the climate. That’s the problem. My point is, unless you have some kind of proof one way or the other, shut up.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong
Google: No Joke: Snow Storm on Tap for April 1
AlaskaFreeman 11 months ago
@AlaskaFreeman "temperatures fluctuate constantly all throw-out history": TRUE ." There is no way to prove which factor is or is not having an effect on the climate" UNTRUE. Each factor has a specific finger print (Sun, CRs, GHGs, Ocean currents, Oscillations) you can match the nature of the warming with the fingerprint and eliminate everything except GHGs or th ebulk of the warming in the last 50 years - even the most sceptical climatologists agree on that.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong There is no science formula out there that can prove for a fact what future temperatures are going to be. There are also, a million deferent variables that could be making the world hotter and there is a million-billion deferent factors that could be making the world colder.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Global temperatures change for a variety of reasons - local temperatures change for even more reasons. You are talking about 1 place at one time - I am talking about 85% of the worlds glaciers are retreating - that does not leave the deniers much wiggle room does it?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman According to NOAA NCDC for November 2010 (latest data available) the % of the US that was classified as very cold or record cold (i.e. well below average temperature) was only 0.63% - about 20,000 sq miles. leaving the other 3.3M sq miles to be average. Whereas the average classified as very warm for the year so far has been about 20% area which is equivalent to about 700,000 sq miles (data from NOAA NCDC - climate monitoring - state of the climate - national overview - areas).
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
Again me From Alaska to Las Vegas to Florida to New York and then to England and all over two year period, I think that’s an area of about 50,000 square miles. Hardly local!
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
Again you
“While it was unusually cold in the eastern US, western Europe, and Australia, the climate was setting record”
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong I want the earth to be warmer, the hotter the better. YOU CAN’T GROW FOOD IN THE COLD AND HOTTER WEATHER MAKES FOR MORE RAIN. THAT IS ALSO A FACT.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong You are sick. Unless you have Proof like 1+1=2, proof, which you don’t according to the Climate-Gate Emails, STOP KILLING THE WORLDS PEOPLE!
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman SIGH! You cannot prove a theory only disprove it. At the moment AGW is the only theory that fits all the facts. You make stuff up and its insulting. It shows how unreasoning you have become. The scientists are trying to stop people from dying - GW could kill millions or even billions (if it precipitates wars as the Pentagon fears). It is already tens of thousands due to droughts, heat waves, huge storms, ..... get real, mate
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong What have I made up. Tens of thousands more people die from smoking in America in a year. I don't see you trying to stop that. Billions of PEOPLE CANT EAT.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
We move to Glacial Growth.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong And now they are growing again. But now according your fake Climate-Gate science we all have to pay more for fuel to stop the warming. Did you know that people from around the world are starving because of the inflationary back lashes of your fake science. How do you sleep at night knowing that Americans are driving round on corn, (because of people like you) when people are starving in Africa and Mexico because corn prices have gone through the roof.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman I attended a climate conference about 6 years ago where the only thing everyone could agree on was that corn-based ethonol was a very bad idea. The politicians egged on by the farm lobby (higher prices) and oil companies (subsidies) pushed the idea and nobody was listening to the experts.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Sure, just like a scientist to take action on a “theory” that pushes politicians to action that kills millions of people then say, oh well it’s not my fault but, tens of thousands may or may not have die from a storm that may or may not have been a result of Global warming.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
GOOGLE: BUSH: USE ETHANOL TO GET OFF OIL, BUSH CALLS FOR ENERGY INDEPENDENCE, STANDS BY ETHANOL ALTHOUGH ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF THE CORN-BASED FUEL ARE QUESTIONED WHILE IT IS BLAMED FOR SURGING FOOD PRICES.
GOOGLE: OBAMA DOOMED TO REPEAT BUSH'S ETHANOL MISTAKES?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman The politicians dont need to be pushed - they make any change their opportunity to push their policies or rather the policies of the big corporations dictated to them. The answer to the cold war was a missile defense system, the solution to 9/11 wasa missile defence system, the solution to Iraq was a missile defense system, the answer to Iran was the same.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Here you go again, stay on topic; I'm again talking about something that in reality happened. Politicians sell congressional votes for money (for reelection) to companies and special interest groups the first half of their term. And then they sell their congressional votes to the public during the last part of their term so that they can get back in to office.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Here we agree - the US political system is corrupt. I was staying on the subject of political influence which has a significant bearing on this whole thing. Did you look at my video "Snowstorms disprove global warming theory"? VXDJLcdv0jk - here I am talking about stuff that is real
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong According to Captain Cook’s writings, at the turn of the 19 century, the Glaciers her in Alaska had receded over 40 miles in-between his two visits. There were very few if at all cars in the world at the time. How do you explain that? The Fact is the world warms and cools whether there are a billion cars on the road or not. Fact: Glaciers around the world have been melting for hundreds of years.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Odd that every expert on glaciers says the reverse. You have a source that none of the experts seems to be aware of - prehaps because it is a fiction or perhaps they dont pay attention to Fox news or the blogosphere.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong No, all the Glaciers in the world have been melting for century’s, Chile, Montana, Alaska and Canada. All have been melting for hundreds of years. Well before cars or industry, look at the photos, study the personal reports (of Captain Cook's journey to Alaska) , &^%$ read something historical about weather.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
Google image: Buerbrae Glacier Norway
Google image: Glacier National Park 1900 and today
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong You know you are a DoucheBag, you keep discounting my facts by pointing out that you think some expert would disagree with me. Look, I can do it too. The creator of the weather channel does not believe in Global warming, and he wants to sue Al Gore for his movie. And you are a DumAss piece of @#^$ compared to him, so you must be wrong about everything that you are saying on the matter. You see how easy it is?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman You dont have any facts at all, you have rumors & mysinformation. E.g., "the creator of weather channel does not believe in Global warming, and he want(s) to sue Gore for his movie" You mean John Coleman - he did not found the weather channel (that was Batten), he was appointed CEO until he was fired after just a year. He is a TV weatherman without a single scientific qualification to his name - he has a BA in journalism (same as Al Gore!). Dont believe me - do some research.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
YOUTUBE: AL GORE SUED BY OVER 30.000 SCIENTISTS FOR GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD / JOHN COLEMAN
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Your a joke. Well then in your own words Doushebag. "John Coleman a Former TV weatherman, Former CEO of the weather channel ( the current authority in weather news) and possessor of a BA in journalism (same as Al Gore), does not believe in Global warming, and along with 30,000 other scientists are going to sue Gore for his movie. If you would like, I will print all the names of the scientist’s and then you could try to discredit each one individually..
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman I see you conveniently skip over the fact that he has NO SCIENTIFIC QUALIFICATIONS WHATSOEVER. "The I am going to sue Al Gore" was a publicity stunt by Coleman about 3 years ago - he never brought any such suit. "Along with 30,000 scientists" is a lie - here you are referring to the Oregon Petition signers (most of whom are not research scientists - check a sample of the names on the web - and only one climatologist) which had nothing to do with signing up for a law suit.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Who would you believe, some so-called expert or your own eyes. Look at the photos of Glaciers from 1900 and older and then look at the photos of those same Glaciers today. The same Glaciers get bigger and bigger the later you go. Look, don’t say anything more until you do some research. You can’t simply write-off fact because some expert told you so. You are a Sheep baaaaaaa.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman When you are sick you go to a doctor. A law problem you go to a lawyer. When you worry about the climate you go to a climatologist. Yes a few glaciers are getting longer for very well known reasons - in some cases because the sea ice shelf in front of them which acts as a dam has collapsed or in others because there has more precipitation at high altitudes (a GW prediction) & because melt water is seeping to the base so speeding their flow. But most are stinking - faster & faster.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong According to GW theory, it is impossible to have any glacier buildup anywhere; it is unfeasible to have record lows temperatures anywhere in the world. Fact: (At an actual greenhouse) Once a greenhouse is full to capacity of Co2, (provided the sun is hitting the greenhouse) the temperatures in the greenhouse don't get colder they get hotter. There are not pockets of extremely cold air anywhere in the greenhouse, it just really fu@&ing hot everywhere. .
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman You make an assertion about the theory that is not true so the rest of you conclusions are faulty. The total effect of AGW is only 1 F so far. That is a fraction of the day to day - week to week and year to year natural variability. So if you have a low temperature record that would have beaten the old one by say 5F then now days it would only beat it by 4F. We will have to wait for decades before the effect is large enough to prevent new low temperature records.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Dude that is not what Al Gore is saying in this video. He is not suggesting one degree or a possible 2 degree change in the space of a few decades. He is suggesting we are all going to be cooking in hell inside of the next decade. You need a little more of the punch. Watch my video again.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Please where is the source of the quote where Gore says that all these changes in a decade?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong
YouTube: Global Warming: Al Gore is wrong again
YOUTUBE: ARCTIC SUMMER ICE MAY BE GONE IN FIVE YEARS, AL GORE WARNS
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman You think the ice caps are growing? Sorry wrong again. See video: Global Warming Answers 4 - jG9PdMlP63c. Two completely indendent measurements give the same answer - they are shrinking at an alarming rate.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong YouTube: Global Warming: 2007 Winter is Cold
"Never before in the history of a research project dating back to 1946 had the Icefields witnessed the kind of snow buildup" - U.S. Geological Survey glaciologist Bruce Molnia 2008
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@@drkstrong You know you’re a liar. Read the data they were talking about. The ice caps are bigger, much bigger.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman No those are other people claiming that he said it. In an Inconvenient truth he gives no timescale for calametous change
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong No, he did say that at some kind of speech or interview. So now, we live in DumbAssland, where Al Gore only says what you want him to say, is that right.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
We move to Global warming data.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong You are proving my point for me. According to GW theory, the more Co2 injected in to the atmosphere the hotter the atmosphere well get (exactly like a green house dues), and like a greenhouse, temperatures in a will not drop until CO2 levels fall. CO2 level in the atmosphere are higher than ever in history and Co2 are increasing at an ever-expanding rate (with china and India growing economies).
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman "more Co2 injected in to the atmosphere the hotter the atmosphere well get" true(ish) - it is not the atmosphere that gets hot & heats everything else but the land and oceans that absorb the back scattered IR that in turn heat the atmosphere. The rest is wrong - you make the incorrect assumption that other larger but short-term factors dont come into play. They do - El Nino / La Nina for example.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong So are you know saying Al Gore is wrong. Yes, now we are getting somewhere. Well I learned about greenhouse gases in grade school and if my information is inaccurate I invite you to pick up any grade school science book and read it for yourself. You make my point again, thank you, El Nino and LaNina are the only provable model the world truly has, and are exactly the one and only reasons why we are have weather extremes on the westcost of the America’s , both hotter and colder.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Basically I’m trying to say your data is flawed, that makes your science flawed. It’s been corrupted by too many outside influences, El Nino and LaNina and the typical temperature cycles are all factors that could easily explain the worlds current weather extremes.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman The IPCC projects take several scenarios into account - 0 increase in GHGs, all the way to an accelerating contribution. I have read the climategate emails (including the string of emails) not just selected phrases. her is nothing there about the globe getting colder. Because again if you look at my Global Warming Answers Video 2 & 3 you will that it is not.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
Huffington Post: Climate-Gate Emails Kevin Trenberth-University of East Anglia, said, "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." was referring to that there was an "incomplete explanation" of the short-term variability of temperatures.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Prove the data is flawed. The raw data, analysis, and methods are all available (NCDC) and none of the sceptical scientists have found any problems with it. Yet you know there is - remarkable that you have found something that nobody else has seen.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong I’m talking about the GW models projections, not the raw data. Hell, even some of the raw data say it's getting colder. Look at the Climate-Gate emails which I have. If you want me to print those, I can. The GW model projections also do not take in to consideration technological advances and emission-deduction technologies like clean coal and mini nuke plants.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Fact is I’m going to be right no matter what I say. Global Warming is not real, un-provable and only a Dumass like this guy believe in it. And we well have to wait and see who is right.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Mock all you like but I am the one with a PhD in astrophysics. Google my book "The Many Faces of the Sun" if you dont believe me.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong You know the world’s oil supply is past its peak that means, for a fact, there is only so much oil left in the world. An automatic decline in Co2 emissions is emanate, no matter what happens with the climate. And with the advent of hydrogen cars over the next ten years and rising oil prices, you will never be able to prove your theory anyways. Do you realize that, you are wasting your time?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman The problem is that coal will replace oil as a cheap energysource and that is much worse from a ghg emissions point of view than oil.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong It’s much more likely they will go with the Mitsubishi mini nuke plants (current tech) for their power needed to fill the hydrogen mini gas plaints (current tech and online). It’s way cheaper and it’s cleaner. No one like’s smoggy air. Did you also forget about the millions of windmills that are going up? Nope, you know nothing about economics or new technology.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Do you really think we are going to be burning coal 50 years from now? Why would we? There is not going to be a market for it. Stop lying to yourself.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Yes we will if the coal lobby get their way and they likely will unless the alternatives become cheaper.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong OOO no no no no. We both know that’s not true. Did you forget about green energy. They currently have solar photo cells that put out 3x current technology and its paper thin too, they say you will be able to line your car and home with it soon.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman I hope that is true but the last time I checked those were goals and the actual technology was falling far short of that. I had understood that the cheap thin ones were less efficent. I attended a seminar on solar cells for spacecarft power systems a couple of years ago and that seemed to be their conclusion - perhaps things have moved on since then.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman I would have no problem with that technology but the coal, oil, and gas, The problem is that some idiots are wanting to mine methane hydrates from the depths of the oceans - if that becomes unstable and starts to melt we are infor a very rough time.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong The bottom of the ocean unstable. hahaha That technology is not even a reality yet. hahahahah. Today, we are talking about today.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman No, not the bottom of the ocean the hydrate deposits. They are frozen below a critical level of the ocean as the oceans warm they could become unstable and puch huge amounts of methane intothe atmosphere - methane is a much more effective GHG than CO2 fortuneately its concentration is currently low and its life time inthe atmosphere is short compared to CO2 (years not decades/centuries) but unfortunately it turns into CO2 (and water vapour)
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong I know all this already. There are like a million methane producing lakes in Alaska and I don’t hear you whining about that. I don’t care, GW is not real or provable and I don’t care about Green House Gases that don’t pollute. If GW was real I would be all for it, growing food is good more ice and snow are bad. A green planet is good, a cold earth is bad.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Heat waves and droughts dont lead to more food. Where GW has had demonstratable effects grain production has dropped.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Don’t you mean, where you think the demonstratable effects are according to your theory, let’s not stray too far from reality, and everyone knows warm weather makes for more rain. Heat evaporates ocean water which makes for more rain. Like hurricanes ( I know there is more to a hurricane like water temp, air temps, air currents, ext.) it's just a simple but, big example .
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Are you now saying that GW is going to evaporate all the clouds in the sky. Sh&* we are all going to die. Are you also now saying if we don’t stop GW "Heat waves and droughts" are going to encompass the entire world and that the ocean waters of the world are going to stop evaporating and producing rain. Wow this is a brake-threw. We are all going to die! Al Gore help us all!
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
We go back to Carbon-based fuels are running out.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Watch TV, I have seen all these technologies work. On channels like PBS, Travel Channel and the Discovery channel. Hell, the military have cars that drive them self's now, they also have robots with big ass guns on them and that's only today. And that's now, what do you think they well have ten years from now?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong LOOK I TOLD YOU, YOU CAN’T PROVE ANYTHING YOU’RE SAYING, NOT FOR AT LEAST 20 YEARS AND BY THEN CO2 WILL NO LONGER BE A PROBLEM. OIL IS RUNNING OUT AND "selected phrases" MEAN A LOT WHEN YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT .08 CHANGES IN CLIMATE. RIGHT! RIGHT!
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Wrong again. Two stories the right and wrong versions.
FOXNEWS: Obama Coal Crackdown Sends Message to Industry. MSNBC: Obama unveils coal, biofuel plans
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
We go back to Al Gore.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Source please. Now a lot of deniers say that he said that but I have never found a reliable quote on it. It certainly is in in neither of his books or movie.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong
Timesonline: Arctic summer ice may be gone in five years, Al Gore warns
YouTube: Al Gore campaigns to save glaciers
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong FOX NEWS, call them. Get their source on Gore's Comments. Then call the source and verify and then print it. That’s called News, that's how it's done. Then you can say I’m wrong if it does not check out, otherwise you are a liar.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Gore is merely reporting what the scientists say - nor do I recall saying he is wrong. Actually I showed in my video - Global Warming Answers 2 & 3: Ai6ju28nAyk - that when you remove the effects of El Nino / La Nina there is a distinct and very significant warming trend over the last 10-15 years.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Deniers interesting, you can’t even prove GW is real. To called someone a denier there has to be something provable to deny. It’s a theory not a Fact, as you have said yourself in the past. There is no such thing as a denier of fiction. The proper word is skeptic. Liberal’s use that kind of terminology, are you a liberal? Because liberal’s are the true deniers, deniers of reality…hahahahah
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Right that one degree you where talking about earlier, sure, sure. One degree is such a small amount, it literally is the margin of error, no matter how solid you think your science is, you’re a joke, and you know what you can do. Take your one degree in climate change and shove it up your margin of error. No scientist with any brains would back a “theory” that fell within the smallest margin possible. I mean your margin has to be something right? What it is it half a degree?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman No 1 degree is not the margin of error on a 1 degree signal - it is about 0.2 (20%) and that could go either way - you cant reserve the lower margin of error and make thta the norm. So 1.2F is as likely to be correct as 0.8F ?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong 0.2 is your margin of error, why not .1 or even .001. Hahaha….So what you are now saying is, 100 years of Co2 injections has possible produced .08 change in the climate as a whole. Bull. It's a fraction of a degree and your calling that science. You are saying, you can personally subtract all other none Co2 variables from this model. A model (which involves the fluidity of the weather,) and then the produced number is a fraction and you are still going to stand by that?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Where do you get 0.08 from - I think you are proving you dont understand statistics or trend fitting.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong “So 1.2F is as likely to be correct as 0.8F” You said that.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Statistics nope never took it. But I do know how to analyze the results and I was told by a statistics teacher, you can statistically prove anything you want. Ask a teacher, that’s the first thing they teach you in class.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Not a very good teacher because that is absolutely untrue. You can use statistics to test whether something is true or not and how likely it is. Read up about it and see for yourself then tell your teacher that they are full of it.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong "How likely it is" is not the same as true. Fu*# pick up a dictionary sometime. Stop making definitions up; a branch of applied mathematics concerned with the collection and interpretation of quantitative data and the use of probability “theory” to estimate population parameters. I don’t see the word TRUE or the word FACT or even the word UNTRUE in that statment.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong An interpretation of a theory does not mean FACT.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong This is between you and me and you are full of sh&#. If you don’t believe statistics can be skewed when one considers the sample group or data collector. Take a poll for example. They are wrong all the time.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman Now where did I say that statistics cannot be misued? There are several different books on the issue - I was given one for Xmas about 5 years ago which I can highly recommend. I'll feret it out and let you know what it is called.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman There are levels of certainty. The criterion in science for true in statistics is 3 sigma - 98.5% probable. If you are dealing with mesurements of a quantity you can never be 100% certain - it is to do with the uncertainty principle & probability theory. The chicken & eggs problem - you pick up 6 eggs from the chicken coup how ceratin are you that you have all chicken eggs laid? Did you miss 1? Did you miscount as you put them in the basket? Did the fox steal one? Is 1 a duck egg?
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman You have not sourced anything yet.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong No, I source my information. You have to prove me wrong. You need to call Al Gore up and back up your BULLSH%*.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman I think you are losing it - time to calm down. TV, for the most part, is not real (including many of the news channels). Dont base your conclusions on infotainment and sensational journalists who are english majors who have never cracked a science book in their lives. I had to explain what helium was to a "science writer" for a major media outlet when he interviewed me. He eventually admitted he had only taken the job as science writer because he wanted to xfer to sports ASAP.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong I’m a journalist, I work for a TV station, I’m not a writer of course because of my dyslexia, but I have done radio, and internet stories. And I would have to agree with you on that fact the Liberal media is full of sh#@, and that most news is bias because of the reporters. But, the media (of course it is totally legal for them to lie) don't lie about hard facts (because lying is a career ender), how they spin that same fact is another story. See Dan Rather or Keith Olbermann
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman "Liberal media" a bit of a give a way on your bias. Every time I have voted I have voted for a conservative some of us conservatives still have a firm grasp on reality.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Well conservative or not, there is nothing conservative about killing people for an unproven theory. There is only right v. wrong in my mind.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman The only peopel who will end up killing people are those that are trying to prevent action against globalwarming. I assume you have read the Pentagon report on the issue, if not look it up. It does not make for comfortable reading.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Was that report anything like the one on WMD in Iraq.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@AlaskaFreeman You think Fox News does any of that. They admit to being infotainment and even went to court and argued that they had no obligation to tell the truth as a news channel. Google "Fox News gets okay to misinform public"
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Just like CNN, MSNBC, and every newspaper in the world. So what’s your problem it’s Constitutional for newspapers to lie. Freedom of the press, you really need to pick up a book sometime.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong Look I’m not making any of this up, lying is stupid. Anybody can lie. It’s when you have a true insight in to a topic that makes one’s words valuable. When will you lib's learn that. I have either read or learned or saw everything I have said on this blog, you can ether look it up or not. It does not matter to me. I have no reason to lie, I’m just a nobody from Alaska who happens to know little something about everything.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong (You want sources, let's get started then. I will find you the sources you have been asking for. I will find you) real climatologist from real university saying exactly what I have been telling you almost verbatim.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
This other guy is wrong and stupid. Even though I’m not the best freestyle writer, I’m the only genius in the House. The deferent’s you may ask, well god gives it to some of us, but not to all of us. I’m done. You my friend can take up your theory of Global warming with these other guys. Why you ask? Because I’m just the guy who is as smart as a climatologist, astrophysicist, four university professors and a climate researcher. I’m not really one.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
YouTube: Global Warming - Doomsday Called Off (1/5)
YouTube: ALERT !!! ICE Age 2011 – 2012
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong - DR. DAVID LEGATES-CENTER OF CLIMATIC RESEARCH- UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE - JORGEN PEDER STEFFENSEN, CURATOR FOR NIELS BOHR INSTITUTE, DEPARTMENT OF GEOPHYSICS - DR. JOHN CHRISTY UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA IN HUNTSVILLE- DR. NILS-AXEL MORNER – STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY -DR.SALLIE BALIUNAS, ASTROPHYSICIST HARVARD UNIVERSITY - MARKETING PROFESSOR SCOTT ARMSTRONG OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA'S –ASTROPHYSICIST AND METEOROLOGIST PIERS CORBYN
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago
@drkstrong And I’m not a scientist; I’m an internet and radio talk show producer. MY BRAIN IS IN TUNE WITH GENIUSES FROM AROUND THE WORLD. I’m watching these videos right now and I’m %@#*ing myself. (Inference) all this (over the last few days) I was so right it’s scary. I took fact made statements that supported those realities and according to these sources I was right.
AlaskaFreeman 1 year ago