Global Warming Pie Chart

[Saigon]

Why push the so-called "theory of AGW" unless there is a goal.

Because it is science.

Science does not have "goals", it has facts, data and evidence.

The only people who deny this - as we know on this board for an absolute fact - are those with extreme political views and a tendency to deny facts, data and evidence in all areas of debate.

 

[westwall]

Why push the so-called "theory of AGW" unless there is a goal.

Because it is science.

Science does not have "goals", it has facts, data and evidence.

The only people who deny this - as we know on this board for an absolute fact - are those with extreme political views and a tendency to deny facts, data and evidence in all areas of debate.

You're dancin' junior but you can't stay with the beat. Answer the question...or are you too frightened to admit that it is YOUR side and TOTALLY YOUR side that is the political one?

Yep, that would make sense. You see dear child, we wish to keep things as they are unless there is COMPELLING evidence that something must be done to control whatever it is you all seem to want to control...which you won't answer for some reason....

 

[ClosedCaption]

The only way the right would care about Global Warming is if it was carrying a Koran.

All they know is that Al Gore is for it, they hate Al Gore, therefore they hate Global Warming science. You couldnt name another issue where tens of thousands of scientists agree that they question. Not one.

 

[Redfish]

The only way the right would care about Global Warming is if it was carrying a Koran.

All they know is that Al Gore is for it, they hate Al Gore, therefore they hate Global Warming science. You couldnt name another issue where tens of thousands of scientists agree that they question. Not one.

If Algore was right, south florida would be underwater by now and greenland would be green. The record cold in most of the world this year is just more proof that global warming is junk science with a political agenda.

Yes, a lot of people hate the prophet algore, because a lot of people hate liars and frauds that made themselves rich at the expense of others.

Gore is the worst example of the greedy capitalists that you libs claim to hate. He bilked YOU for millions, and you still love him.

liberalism is truly a mental disease.

 

[ClosedCaption]

See, its all About Al. I know he gained some weight but not enough where you cant see past him and see the entire earth

 

[JoeNormal]

What's a climatic optimum?

For whom and where?

Instead of posting your ignorance with really stupid questions like that, why don't you investigate what a rapid warming will mean to the agriculture that 7 billion people depend on. You might start by looking at the droughts and floods that have affected agriculture worldwide for the last 3 years.

What "rapid warming"? All the major warmists all admit no warming for at least 10 years and a maximum of 17 according to the head of the IPCC.

You've got some 'splainin to doooooo!

'Nuff said.

 

[JoeNormal]

Westwall -

No, I don't think any of you are Nazis at all, and I apologise if that was how you interpreted my post.

All four of you seem to hold political views closer to a kind of militant Randism than towards Fascism.

I do think all of you hold such very extreme right wing views that dealing with any kind of facts is simply impossible, because facts contradict your extreme world view. The desire to deny what is in dictionaries and what is seen out the window is essential to anyone holding very extreme views - be they Islamic fundamentalists, Christian fundamentalists, Fascists, Communists or any other kind of fundamentalist.

It's pure Glenn Beck revisionist history. Now watch, they'll all be offended that I suggested they listen to Glenn Beck.

 

[Saigon]

The record cold in most of the world this year is just more proof that global warming is junk science with a political agenda.
.

Ignorance is not an excuse.

You talk about liberalism being a mental disease, and yet here you are posting something 180 degress the opposite of the facts.

The numbers are in: 2012, the year of a surreal March heat wave, a severe drought in the Corn Belt and a huge storm that caused broad devastation in the Middle Atlantic States, turns out to have been the hottest year ever recorded in the contiguous United States.

An unusually warm March left the soil dried out in much of the country, helping to set the stage for a drought that peaked during what became the warmest July on record. Parched corn in Paola, Kan.

How hot was it? The temperature differences between years are usually measured in fractions of a degree, but last year’s 55.3 degree average demolished the previous record, set in 1998, by a full degree Fahrenheit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/science/earth/2012-was-hottest-year-ever-in-us.html?_r=0

I do hope to read your apology, because this kind of posting requires one.

 

[healthmyths]

Why push the so-called "theory of AGW" unless there is a goal.

Because it is science.

Science does not have "goals", it has facts, data and evidence.

The only people who deny this - as we know on this board for an absolute fact - are those with extreme political views and a tendency to deny facts, data and evidence in all areas of debate.

"Science" does NOT have an agenda.
In this case the AGW is part of a political agenda.
As a result, the tendency is for a less then "pure" scientist to eliminate some readings.

As a result, I'm suspicious when the BASE point of AGW is the temperature reading stations that have been continuously recording temperatures from 1901.

"The number of [Siberian] stations increased from 8 in 1901 to 23 in 1951 and then decreased to 12 from 1989 to present only four stations, those at Irkutsk, Bratsk, Chita and Kirensk, cover the entire 20th century.
IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations…
The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world’s land mass.
The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.
Climategatekeeping: Siberia « Climate Audit

"We found [U.S. weather] stations located next to the exhaust fans of air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering-hot rooftops, and near sidewalks and buildings that absorb and radiate heat. We found 68 stations located at wastewater treatment plants, where the process of waste digestion causes temperatures to be higher than in surrounding areas.

In fact, we found that 89 percent of the stations – nearly 9 of every 10 – fail to meet the National Weather Service’s own siting requirements that stations must be 30 meters (about 100 feet) or more away from an artificial heating or radiating/reflecting heat source." (Watts 2009) Are surface temperature records reliable?

In the 1970s concerned environmentalists like Stephen Schneider of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado feared a return to another ice age due to manmade atmospheric pollution blocking out the sun.

Since about 1940 the global climate did in fact appear to be cooling. Then a funny thing happened-- sometime in the late 1970s temperature declines slowed to a halt and ground-based recording stations during the 1980s and 1990s began reading small but steady increases in near-surface temperatures. Fears of "global cooling" then changed suddenly to "global warming,"-- the cited cause:

manmade atmospheric pollution causing a runaway greenhouse effect.
Global Warming:A Chilling Perspective

So please refute the simplest illustration that the temperature reading stations were biased BEFORE NOA satellites providing base points to declare "Global warming" when these stations are prone to error... especially when 12.5% of land mass i.e. Siberia readings are not taken into account!

 

[ClosedCaption]

Health has questions that he doesnt know the answer too therefore the topic he doesnt understand is fake

 

[westwall]

The only way the right would care about Global Warming is if it was carrying a Koran.

All they know is that Al Gore is for it, they hate Al Gore, therefore they hate Global Warming science. You couldnt name another issue where tens of thousands of scientists agree that they question. Not one.

No, we would care about it if it were HAPPENING. But it's not. More to the point we also know how to read history books (something you clearly lack) and in every case when it has been warmer the planet has done better.

But that would be science and history and you political operatives do neither.

 

[westwall]

The record cold in most of the world this year is just more proof that global warming is junk science with a political agenda.
.

Ignorance is not an excuse.

You talk about liberalism being a mental disease, and yet here you are posting something 180 degress the opposite of the facts.

The numbers are in: 2012, the year of a surreal March heat wave, a severe drought in the Corn Belt and a huge storm that caused broad devastation in the Middle Atlantic States, turns out to have been the hottest year ever recorded in the contiguous United States.

An unusually warm March left the soil dried out in much of the country, helping to set the stage for a drought that peaked during what became the warmest July on record. Parched corn in Paola, Kan.

How hot was it? The temperature differences between years are usually measured in fractions of a degree, but last year’s 55.3 degree average demolished the previous record, set in 1998, by a full degree Fahrenheit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/science/earth/2012-was-hottest-year-ever-in-us.html?_r=0

I do hope to read your apology, because this kind of posting requires one.

Still waiting for you to answer my question about what the goal of the governments is to fight "globalwarmingclimatechangeglobalclimatedisruption" which hasn't happened for at least a decade but they are still pushing for something...so what is it?

 

[JoeNormal]

The record cold in most of the world this year is just more proof that global warming is junk science with a political agenda.
.

Ignorance is not an excuse.

You talk about liberalism being a mental disease, and yet here you are posting something 180 degress the opposite of the facts.

The numbers are in: 2012, the year of a surreal March heat wave, a severe drought in the Corn Belt and a huge storm that caused broad devastation in the Middle Atlantic States, turns out to have been the hottest year ever recorded in the contiguous United States.

An unusually warm March left the soil dried out in much of the country, helping to set the stage for a drought that peaked during what became the warmest July on record. Parched corn in Paola, Kan.

How hot was it? The temperature differences between years are usually measured in fractions of a degree, but last year’s 55.3 degree average demolished the previous record, set in 1998, by a full degree Fahrenheit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/science/earth/2012-was-hottest-year-ever-in-us.html?_r=0

I do hope to read your apology, because this kind of posting requires one.

Still waiting for you to answer my question about what the goal of the governments is to fight "globalwarmingclimatechangeglobalclimatedisruption" which hasn't happened for at least a decade but they are still pushing for something...so what is it?

I already posted a graphic that shows your golden decade of temperature stability to be complete bullshit. What more do you want? As for "globalwarmingclimatechangeglobalclimatedisruption", the name was changed because cons are too dense to wrap their heads around the implications of anything simply called global warming.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The only way the right would care about Global Warming is if it was carrying a Koran.

All they know is that Al Gore is for it, they hate Al Gore, therefore they hate Global Warming science. You couldnt name another issue where tens of thousands of scientists agree that they question. Not one.

No, we would care about it if it were HAPPENING. But it's not. More to the point we also know how to read history books (something you clearly lack) and in every case when it has been warmer the planet has done better.

But that would be science and history and you political operatives do neither.

I notice you only talk about weather (being hotter) and not about everything else Climate Change addresses like, water, air, land etc...Just "warmer is better". Please tell me, history buff, what history book made the statement "when it's hotter the earth does better" LOL

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The only way the right would care about Global Warming is if it was carrying a Koran.

All they know is that Al Gore is for it, they hate Al Gore, therefore they hate Global Warming science. You couldnt name another issue where tens of thousands of scientists agree that they question. Not one.

No, we would care about it if it were HAPPENING. But it's not. More to the point we also know how to read history books (something you clearly lack) and in every case when it has been warmer the planet has done better.

But that would be science and history and you political operatives do neither.

I notice you only talk about weather (being hotter) and not about everything else Climate Change addresses like, water, air, land etc...Just "warmer is better". Please tell me, history buff, what history book made the statement "when it's hotter the earth does better" LOL

What's a climatic optimum?
Why do they call it that?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Westwall the history buff claims that history books taught us when its warmer the earth does better...you cant make this stuff up

 

[Saigon]

Tood -

Probably beause conditions at the time of the Holocene Climatic Optimum were similar to today.

Yes - it is THAT sinister.

By 6,000 years ago, the time normally associated with the Holocene Climatic Optimum in the Northern Hemisphere, these regions had reached temperatures similar to those existing in the modern era, and did not participate in the temperature changes of the North. However, some authors have used the term "Holocene Climatic Optimum" to describe this earlier southern warm period as well.

Holocene climatic optimum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Is this what passes for political discussion in a liberal mind?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Tood -

Probably beause conditions at the time of the Holocene Climatic Optimum were similar to today.

Yes - it is THAT sinister.

By 6,000 years ago, the time normally associated with the Holocene Climatic Optimum in the Northern Hemisphere, these regions had reached temperatures similar to those existing in the modern era, and did not participate in the temperature changes of the North. However, some authors have used the term "Holocene Climatic Optimum" to describe this earlier southern warm period as well.

Holocene climatic optimum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why do they use the word optimum? Why not use your word?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Only progressives and other peoples tax dollars can save the planet.........Heroic they are.........lol