Climate Change Skeptics Eat Crow

[Si modo]

One thing at a time. We agree that the world is getting warmer, right?

I'll agree that we are warmer lately than 1800.

Now, show the science demonstrating the sgnificance and magnitude of man made CO2 on warming.

 

[westwall]

One thing at a time. We agree that the world is getting warmer, right?

Yes, to a point. Currently it appears that global temperatures have actually levelled off. There has been no measurable increase in global temps since 1998. The temps that have supposedly risen since then are well within the error bands of the statistical analysis which means that if there is a temp increase it is so small that it can't be measured.

This follows a period of around 20 years of global warming. Prior to that there was a period of global cooling that had lasted approximately 30 years. It now appears (based on solar research data) that we will be once again entering into a cooling phase.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I linked to the EPA. Not to opinion.

What's Known Scientists know with virtual certainty that:

Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.

The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.

An “unequivocal” warming trend of about 1.0 to 1.7°F occurred from 1906-2005. Warming occurred in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, and over the oceans (IPCC, 2007).

The major greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from decades to centuries. It is therefore virtually certain that atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will continue to rise over the next few decades.

Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations tend to warm the planet."

The data shows that the world is warmer.

Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: Analysis Graphs and Plots

The data also shows that the world began warming 14,000 years ago. I may be missing something, but I don't recall SUV's cruising around back then. The graph only tells you that the world is warming. We know that. The cause is what is being argued or is that beyond you?

So far, no data has been presented by the warmist camp, that shows man is responsible for the warming. Instead, the only empirical evidence we have counters their fundamental tenet (and yes I am using that term intentionally) that CO2 is the cause of the warming.

The best evidence for CO2 having no correlative responsibility for the warming is the Vostock ice core samples which show unequivocally that warming occurs first and then 800 or so years later the CO2 levels rise.

That means the current CO2 level rise we are witnessing can be just as reasonably attributed to that cause, as to any other cause put forth. It is after all around 800 years since the Medieval Warming Period and the temps were demonstrably higher globally then, then they are now.

To further put the nail into the coffin of CO2 being a temperature driver, those same ice cores show that during the Holocene Thermal Maximum of around 8,000 years ago the temperature warmed, hundreds of years afterwards the CO2 levels increased, then there followed 300 or so years of cooling, and the CO2 level remained elevated, then there was a further 300 year period of warmth followed by a further 300 year period of cooling, then the CO2 levles finally began to drop again after 1000 years of elevated levels.

So, you see, the very theory of AGW has been proven false. That single study (kindly provided by olfraud) refutes everything you have built your entire religion upon. And yes, yours is the faith based belief. Why else would your high priests engage in the persecution of "heresy" they proclaim?

It is your side that is attempting to squash dissent. It is your side who persecutes the "blasphemers of the "word". It is your side that has engaged in the wholesale denial of studies that counter the belief system they have instituted. You are the folks running the Inquisition now.

Thank you for making it so obvious.

The best evidence for CO2 having no correlative responsibility for the warming is the Vostock ice core samples which show unequivocally that warming occurs first and then 800 or so years later the CO2 levels rise.

I could see that on idiot Gore's stupid Powerpoint presentation.

 

[SAT]

You see the graph. The climb is steady. There are ups and downs, but the trend is clear.

The earth is getting warmer.

2010 is tied for the warmest year on record.

WASHINGTON -- Global surface temperatures in 2010 tied 2005 as the warmest on record, according to an analysis released Wednesday by researchers at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York.

The two years differed by less than 0.018 degrees Fahrenheit. The difference is smaller than the uncertainty in comparing the temperatures of recent years, putting them into a statistical tie. In the new analysis, the next warmest years are 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007 and 2009, which are statistically tied for third warmest year. The GISS records begin in 1880.

The analysis found 2010 approximately 1.13 F warmer than the average global surface temperature from 1951 to 1980. To measure climate change, scientists look at long-term trends. The temperature trend, including data from 2010, shows the climate has warmed by approximately 0.36 F per decade since the late 1970s.

"If the warming trend continues, as is expected, if greenhouse gases continue to increase, the 2010 record will not stand for long," said James Hansen, the director of GISS.

NASA - NASA Research Finds 2010 Tied for Warmest Year on Record

This is NASA data. We can agree that this is a solid source of factual data, and that 2010 is tied for 2005 for the warmest year on record, and that six other years out of the last 14 are tied for third.

This means that the earth is definitely getting warmer, and we have a credible source saying so, right?

 

[Political Junky]

Corporate America will say anything to keep from having to regulate polution or find alternative fuels. Those who support them are, sadly, duped.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Corporate America will say anything to keep from having to regulate polution or find alternative fuels. Those who support them are, sadly, duped.

You're free to overpay for alternatives. Leave me out of it.

 

[skookerasbil]

All I'm doing is asking you to look at something pertinent.

Look at the graph. The world is getting warmer. We agree on that, right?

So what if EVERYBODY agrees on that. How does that matter?

Bottom line is.........the nutter alarmists need to bookmark this link........ http://failblog.org/ ...........because it 2011. They've thrown every single bomb possible for the last 20 years, and their cause is more hopeless than ever!!! In fact........so much so that recently, this whole forum has become rather boring to me. It is what it is at this point. The nutters will keep ranting.........but nobody's listening now.

 

[Political Junky]

Corporate America will say anything to keep from having to regulate polution or find alternative fuels. Those who support them are, sadly, duped.

You're free to overpay for alternatives. Leave me out of it.

Did you believe them when they told you that cigarettes aren't harmful?

 

[SAT]

All I'm doing is asking you to look at something pertinent.

Look at the graph. The world is getting warmer. We agree on that, right?

So what if EVERYBODY agrees on that. How does that matter?

It matters so that we can have a discussion on the topic.

If people are even denying that the Earth is getting warmer, or if they are saying that the warming has essentially stopped, or if they're pouting so badly that they'll only concede that the Earth has gotten warmer since modern record keeping in 1880, then we don't want to bother with such delusional people in our discussion, do we?

 

[westwall]

You see the graph. The climb is steady. There are ups and downs, but the trend is clear.

The earth is getting warmer.

2010 is tied for the warmest year on record.

WASHINGTON -- Global surface temperatures in 2010 tied 2005 as the warmest on record, according to an analysis released Wednesday by researchers at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York.

The two years differed by less than 0.018 degrees Fahrenheit. The difference is smaller than the uncertainty in comparing the temperatures of recent years, putting them into a statistical tie. In the new analysis, the next warmest years are 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007 and 2009, which are statistically tied for third warmest year. The GISS records begin in 1880.

The analysis found 2010 approximately 1.13 F warmer than the average global surface temperature from 1951 to 1980. To measure climate change, scientists look at long-term trends. The temperature trend, including data from 2010, shows the climate has warmed by approximately 0.36 F per decade since the late 1970s.

"If the warming trend continues, as is expected, if greenhouse gases continue to increase, the 2010 record will not stand for long," said James Hansen, the director of GISS.

NASA - NASA Research Finds 2010 Tied for Warmest Year on Record

This is NASA data. We can agree that this is a solid source of factual data, and that 2010 is tied for 2005 for the warmest year on record, and that six other years out of the last 14 are tied for third.

This means that the earth is definitely getting warmer, and we have a credible source saying so, right?

Look at the bottom graph. That is from BEST. It clearly shows a levelling off of global temps starting in the late 90's. The upper graph shows the overall rise in temperatures that began the most recent time in the 1850s with the end of the Little Ice Age. The point of the two graphs is yes the planet is warming and has been for the last hundred and fifty years (with 30 or so year cool downs in between) and the warming obviously happened long bfore man could have had any impact on the climate.

 

[westwall]

Corporate America will say anything to keep from having to regulate polution or find alternative fuels. Those who support them are, sadly, duped.

You're free to overpay for alternatives. Leave me out of it.

Did you believe them when they told you that cigarettes aren't harmful?

Did you believe you when you said MTBE wasn't harmful and would be great for air quality?
We warned you that it was a terrible poison and you ignored us. You caused billions in environmental damage and poisoned water wells all over the state of California.

What do you have to say for yourself?

 

[Political Junky]

You're free to overpay for alternatives. Leave me out of it.

Did you believe them when they told you that cigarettes aren't harmful?

Did you believe you when you said MTBE wasn't harmful and would be great for air quality?
We warned you that it was a terrible poison and you ignored us. You caused billions in environmental damage and poisoned water wells all over the state of California.

What do you have to say for yourself?

Nice dodge.

 

[SAT]

The warmest years on record are 2005 and 2010. Then six years are tied for third place, and they have all occurred since 1998.

The earth is unequivocally in a warming trend. The NASA data shows that.

They aren't altering the Y axis on the NASA graph to make a point. They just show the temperatures increasing, and they state that the warmest years on record have occurred since 1998.

So the Earth is getting warmer, right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Corporate America will say anything to keep from having to regulate polution or find alternative fuels. Those who support them are, sadly, duped.

You're free to overpay for alternatives. Leave me out of it.

Did you believe them when they told you that cigarettes aren't harmful?

They were called coffin nails for decades before the Surgeon General came out with his report.

The suspicion that smoking tobacco caused damage to the user’s heart and lungs dates back centuries. In 1604, King James I of Great Britain had remarked in his “Counterblaste to Tobacco” that smoking was “dangerous to the lungs.” In 1867, George William Curtis, the editor of Harper’s Weekly, who himself had stopped smoking in the 1850s, wrote three commentaries warning of health hazards from using tobacco.

Coffin Nails:* The Tobacco Controversy in the 19th Century

 

[Political Junky]

You're free to overpay for alternatives. Leave me out of it.

Did you believe them when they told you that cigarettes aren't harmful?

They were called coffin nails for decades before the Surgeon General came out with his report.

The suspicion that smoking tobacco caused damage to the user’s heart and lungs dates back centuries. In 1604, King James I of Great Britain had remarked in his “Counterblaste to Tobacco” that smoking was “dangerous to the lungs.” In 1867, George William Curtis, the editor of Harper’s Weekly, who himself had stopped smoking in the 1850s, wrote three commentaries warning of health hazards from using tobacco.

Coffin Nails:* The Tobacco Controversy in the 19th Century

You don't remember tobacco executives testifying before congress and lying?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Did you believe them when they told you that cigarettes aren't harmful?

They were called coffin nails for decades before the Surgeon General came out with his report.

The suspicion that smoking tobacco caused damage to the user’s heart and lungs dates back centuries. In 1604, King James I of Great Britain had remarked in his “Counterblaste to Tobacco” that smoking was “dangerous to the lungs.” In 1867, George William Curtis, the editor of Harper’s Weekly, who himself had stopped smoking in the 1850s, wrote three commentaries warning of health hazards from using tobacco.

Coffin Nails:* The Tobacco Controversy in the 19th Century

You don't remember tobacco executives testifying before congress and lying?

I remember Al Gore lying in his silly movie.

 

[skookerasbil]

All I'm doing is asking you to look at something pertinent.

Look at the graph. The world is getting warmer. We agree on that, right?

So what if EVERYBODY agrees on that. How does that matter?

It matters so that we can have a discussion on the topic.

If people are even denying that the Earth is getting warmer, or if they are saying that the warming has essentially stopped, or if they're pouting so badly that they'll only concede that the Earth has gotten warmer since modern record keeping in 1880, then we don't want to bother with such delusional people in our discussion, do we?

A discussion about temperatures???

Gee........thats so exciting, I can hardly contain myself.


So why are the delusional, like me, winning??? When in the last three years has there been even one report about Congress working on any kind of significant greenhouse gas cap?? Oh......pardon me.......they did pass something on light bulbs!!



Nobody gives a rat ass about the temperatures s0n!!

 

[SAT]

You're saying that a discussion about temperature has no place in a global warming thread?

 

[skookerasbil]

You're saying that a discussion about temperature has no place in a global warming thread?

Im saying group navel contemplation is as relevant!!

 

[SAT]

You're saying that a discussion about temperature has no place in a global warming thread?

Im saying group navel contemplation is as relevant!!

Then you're built too low for this discussion. There's no way you can discuss any of the topic if you don't see a relationship in GLOBAL WARMING to the temperature.