Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Molecules generally do not exist in stars except in their very upper atmospheres, its too hot.
...it's too hot, because of Global Warming right?
You truly are not at all interested in a serious debate, are you?
Molecules generally do not exist in stars except in their very upper atmospheres, its too hot.
...it's too hot, because of Global Warming right?
You truly are not at all interested in a serious debate, are you?
...it's too hot, because of Global Warming right?
You truly are not at all interested in a serious debate, are you?
His name is CrusaderFrank...which is hillbilly for Jihadist Akmed...do you think Jihadists can be reasoned with?
These translations from lunatic fringe to equivilent lunatic fringe get confusing sometimes, so your error is quite common.
Ol' dumb fuck Frankie has been supplied with many repeatable experiments, by myself and many others. He simply ignores the fact and keeps right on posting his nonsense. Not a person to be taken seriously on any subject whatsoever.
Once is an anomoly
Twice is a coincidence
Three times is a pattern
This last winter certainly has people talking about climate change and while its very possible this winter was a sign of things to come, until we see three years like that its not a pattern.
OH and for those that say its IMPOSSIBLE for us to effect our climate:
Dust Bowl - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Its time to wake up. Global Warming may or may not be happening, but its entirely possible that we ARE having an effect as we have had an effect before. Less than a hundred years ago in fact.
Nothing in the article shows man affecting the CLIMATE. The top soil erosion was exacerbated by poor farming techniques. But the drought was natural. And more to the point was within normal cyclic variability. Try reading about the farmers in the 1800's and how they struggled with drought.
The drought was worsened by the poor farming techniques. Less vegetation leads to lower water retention by the soil - which leads to less vegetation. A nasty feedback cycle worsened by man.
Ol' dumb fuck Frankie has been supplied with many repeatable experiments, by myself and many others. He simply ignores the fact and keeps right on posting his nonsense. Not a person to be taken seriously on any subject whatsoever.
...it's too hot, because of Global Warming right?
You truly are not at all interested in a serious debate, are you?
Most of the time I am, but there are times when I feel it's just better to mock ideas that are just too dumb to be taken seriously, like say the notion that a .01% change in the Earth atmosphere causes Cat 5 hurricanes, acidifies the oceans and causes "global warming".
I'm trying to get you as a scientist to see how totally absurd the proposition is.
Nothing in the article shows man affecting the CLIMATE. The top soil erosion was exacerbated by poor farming techniques. But the drought was natural. And more to the point was within normal cyclic variability. Try reading about the farmers in the 1800's and how they struggled with drought.
The drought was worsened by the poor farming techniques. Less vegetation leads to lower water retention by the soil - which leads to less vegetation. A nasty feedback cycle worsened by man.
What a fucking joke of a scientist you are. No, it didn't. It was no worse than any other major drought witnessed by that area in fact it was milder than some. The loss of top soil was catastrophic to the farmers but that in no way made the drought worse. My gosh. You call yourself a scientist and you trot this shit out.
The Dust Bowl drought of the 1930s was highly unusual for North America, deviating from the typical pattern forced by La Nina with the maximum drying in the central and northern Plains, warm temperature anomalies across almost the entire continent, and widespread dust storms. General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.
Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis
On March 18, 2012, Arctic sea ice extent reached its annual maximum extent, marking the beginning of the melt season for Northern Hemisphere sea ice. This years maximum extent was the ninth lowest in the satellite record.
Fucking tard. This was from the link where you got your picture. Do you know how to read? Did you think we wouldn't look? Dumbass.
I know that only 6% of scientists are Republicans.
Every time I read one of your posts I wonder what % of Democrats are rude, inconsiderate ignoramuses with no concept of rational thought or courteous discourse.
Just the fact you list "liberal logic" and then write some zany nonsense only a fool would believe proves you are both a dumbass and a tard. Too stupid to even know it's YOU who's rude.
Nothing in the article shows man affecting the CLIMATE. The top soil erosion was exacerbated by poor farming techniques. But the drought was natural. And more to the point was within normal cyclic variability. Try reading about the farmers in the 1800's and how they struggled with drought.
The drought was worsened by the poor farming techniques. Less vegetation leads to lower water retention by the soil - which leads to less vegetation. A nasty feedback cycle worsened by man.
What a fucking joke of a scientist you are. No, it didn't. It was no worse than any other major drought witnessed by that area in fact it was milder than some. The loss of top soil was catastrophic to the farmers but that in no way made the drought worse. My gosh. You call yourself a scientist and you trot this shit out.
You truly are not at all interested in a serious debate, are you?
Most of the time I am, but there are times when I feel it's just better to mock ideas that are just too dumb to be taken seriously, like say the notion that a .01% change in the Earth atmosphere causes Cat 5 hurricanes, acidifies the oceans and causes "global warming".
I'm trying to get you as a scientist to see how totally absurd the proposition is.
Well do you want to talk about notions or about science?
Ol' dumb fuck Frankie has been supplied with many repeatable experiments, by myself and many others. He simply ignores the fact and keeps right on posting his nonsense. Not a person to be taken seriously on any subject whatsoever.
Global warming seems to be the new "Normal". This has been the warmest March on record. We are having forest fires in New York state , brush fires on the EAST coast. Destructive tornadoes in the west in March. This is disturbing. Someone here wants to imply the weather is somehow, NORMAL? Not buying it, buddy. Something is wrong with that evaluation based on first hand experience. I add, a tornado alert has gone off near my house, ironically. We have never had that THIS happen this early in the year...
Once is an anomoly
Twice is a coincidence
Three times is a pattern
This last winter certainly has people talking about climate change and while its very possible this winter was a sign of things to come, until we see three years like that its not a pattern.
OH and for those that say its IMPOSSIBLE for us to effect our climate:
Dust Bowl - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
During early European and American exploration of the Great Plains, the region in which the Dust Bowl occurred was thought unsuitable for European-style agriculture; the region was known as the Great American Desert. The lack of surface water and timber made the region less attractive than other areas for pioneer settlement and agriculture. Following the Civil War, settlement was encouraged by the Homestead Act, the transcontinental railroad, and waves of new immigrants, and cultivation increased.[3][4] An unusually wet period in the Great Plains mistakenly led settlers and the federal government to believe that "rain follows the plow" (a popular phrase among real estate promoters) and that the climate of the region had changed permanently.[5] The initial agricultural endeavors were primarily cattle ranching, with some cultivation; however, a series of harsh winters beginning in 1886, coupled with overgrazing followed by a short drought in 1890, led to an expansion of land under cultivation.
Continued waves of immigration from Europe brought settlers to the plains at the beginning of the 20th century. A return of unusually wet weather confirmed a previously held opinion that the "formerly" semiarid area could support large-scale agriculture. Technological improvements led to increase of mechanized plowing, which allowed for cultivation on a greater scale. World War I increased agricultural prices, which also encouraged farmers to dramatically increase cultivation. In the Llano Estacado, the area of farmland doubled between 1900 and 1920, and land under cultivation more than tripled between 1925 and 1930.[6] Finally, farmers did not use appropriate practices for the environment, but agricultural methods that allowed erosion.[1] For example, cotton farmers left fields bare over winter months, when winds in the High Plains are highest, and burned the stubble (as a form of weeding prior to planting), both depriving the soil of organic nutrients and increasing exposure to erosion.
The increased exposure to erosion was revealed when severe drought struck the Great Plains through the 1930s. The native grasses that once covered the prairie lands for centuries, holding the soil in place and maintaining its moisture, had been eliminated by the intensively increased plowing. The drought conditions caused the topsoil to grow dry and friable, and was carried away by the wind.
Its time to wake up. Global Warming may or may not be happening, but its entirely possible that we ARE having an effect as we have had an effect before. Less than a hundred years ago in fact.
The drought was worsened by the poor farming techniques. Less vegetation leads to lower water retention by the soil - which leads to less vegetation. A nasty feedback cycle worsened by man.
What a fucking joke of a scientist you are. No, it didn't. It was no worse than any other major drought witnessed by that area in fact it was milder than some. The loss of top soil was catastrophic to the farmers but that in no way made the drought worse. My gosh. You call yourself a scientist and you trot this shit out.
So says someone that considers himself a scientist, then denigrates the mojority of scientists in the world. Everything that I have read does state that loss of vegatation increases the loss of soil moisture. But then I tend to read peer reviewed articles, not lies by the like of Anthony Watt, and the fake English Lord.
What a fucking joke of a scientist you are. No, it didn't. It was no worse than any other major drought witnessed by that area in fact it was milder than some. The loss of top soil was catastrophic to the farmers but that in no way made the drought worse. My gosh. You call yourself a scientist and you trot this shit out.
So says someone that considers himself a scientist, then denigrates the mojority of scientists in the world. Everything that I have read does state that loss of vegatation increases the loss of soil moisture. But then I tend to read peer reviewed articles, not lies by the like of Anthony Watt, and the fake English Lord.
No, dumbass, I denigrate the majority of CLIMATOLOGISTS. They are not the majority of scientists in the world. They are however, a significant majority of the scientists committing academic fraud.
So says someone that considers himself a scientist, then denigrates the mojority of scientists in the world. Everything that I have read does state that loss of vegatation increases the loss of soil moisture. But then I tend to read peer reviewed articles, not lies by the like of Anthony Watt, and the fake English Lord.
No, dumbass, I denigrate the majority of CLIMATOLOGISTS. They are not the majority of scientists in the world. They are however, a significant majority of the scientists committing academic fraud.
Bullshit. American Geophysical Union, Geological Society of America, and the Royal Society are not made up exclusively of climatologists. In fact, the majority of the scientists in those organizatons are from other disciplines. Yet all have rather strong statements on AGW.
As for the fraud charge, look in the mirror.
pffft... buncha know-nothing nobodies by the Chicken Little standards.No, dumbass, I denigrate the majority of CLIMATOLOGISTS. They are not the majority of scientists in the world. They are however, a significant majority of the scientists committing academic fraud.
Bullshit. American Geophysical Union, Geological Society of America, and the Royal Society are not made up exclusively of climatologists. In fact, the majority of the scientists in those organizatons are from other disciplines. Yet all have rather strong statements on AGW.
As for the fraud charge, look in the mirror.
Bullshit right back atcha buckwheat. All of those organizations are headed by people wholly dependent on taxpayer largesse to fund themselves. Funny how you are all over the practice when it's the Military Industrial Complex, but when it's the Acedemic Industrial Complex you're blind as a myopic bat.
Here are 49 current and former NASA scientists and what they have to say about the "science" of global warming...or is it climate change this week?
And here's another clue....when you are reduced to changing the name three times in two years in order to try and drum up public support and falsify data across the board like Hansen is doing....THAT is academic fraud nimrod. The very ESSENCE of it.
March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001
Dear Charlie,
We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.
The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.
As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.
For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.
Thank you for considering this request.
Sincerely,
(Attached signatures)
CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science
CC: Ass Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight Center
Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.
/s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years
/s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years
/s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years
/s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years
/s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years
/s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years
/s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years
/s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years
/s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years
/s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years
/s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years
/s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years
/s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years
/s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years
/s/ Anita Gale
/s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years
/s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years
/s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years
/s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space Center, 22 years
/s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years
/s/ Thomas J. Harmon
/s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years
/s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years
/s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years
/s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years
/s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years
/s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years
/s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space Center, 24 years
/s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, Ass.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years
/s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen
/s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, Ass’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years
/s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years
/s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years
/s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years
/s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years
/s/ Tom Ohesorge
/s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years
/s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years
/s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate,40 years
/s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years
/s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years
/s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years
/s/ Kenneth Suit – JSC, Ass’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years
/s/ Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years/s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years
/s/ Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years
/s/ Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years
/s/ George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years
/s/ Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years
/s/ Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years
No, dumbass, I denigrate the majority of CLIMATOLOGISTS. They are not the majority of scientists in the world. They are however, a significant majority of the scientists committing academic fraud.
Bullshit. American Geophysical Union, Geological Society of America, and the Royal Society are not made up exclusively of climatologists. In fact, the majority of the scientists in those organizatons are from other disciplines. Yet all have rather strong statements on AGW.
As for the fraud charge, look in the mirror.
