It's 20 degrees with Icy Roads again in Denver...

[Old Rocks]

It's been 30 years of warming bullshit, they're in the "climate change" cycle now. Before the decade is over they'll be back to "global cooling" predicting an ice age, famines, and the end of mankind.

A New Ice Age was what they Predicted @ the First Earth Day back in the 70's, wasn't it?...

THEY WERE RIGHT!... HA!



peace...

Really dumb shit, been refuted time and again.

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

The skeptic argument...


Ice age predicted in the 70s
"[M]any publications now claiming the world is on the brink of a global warming disaster said the same about an impending ice age – just 30 years ago. Several major ones, including The New York Times, Time magazine and Newsweek, have reported on three or even four different climate shifts since 1895." (Fire and Ice)

What the science says...

The vast majority of climate papers in the 1970s predicted warming.

In the thirty years leading up to the 1970s, available temperature recordings suggested that there was a cooling trend. As a result some scientists suggested that the current inter-glacial period could rapidly draw to a close, which might result in the Earth plunging into a new ice age over the next few centuries. This idea could have been reinforced by the knowledge that the smog that climatologists call ‘aerosols’ – emitted by human activities into the atmosphere – also caused cooling. In fact, as temperature recording has improved in coverage, it’s become apparent that the cooling trend was most pronounced in northern land areas and that global temperature trends were in fact relatively steady during the period prior to 1970.

At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming – warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.

By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember

 

[Old Rocks]

It's almost May... It's been under 10 degrees recently...

Do I have to start driving Leaded Gasoline Powered Cars again to get Global Warming back up and running?...

Oh... More Snow and Colder Temps longer IS Global Warming?...

Got it.

Is algore still Hibernating?...



peace...

The global warming enviro nazis are also claiming the unusually cold weather is due to.....global warming...

Once again we have the willfully ignorant flap-yapping about things of which they have little understanding, and, possibly, not the capability of understanding.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtRvcXUIyZg]Weather and Climate Summit - Day 5, Jennifer Francis - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PredFan]

In the first place, snow and freezing temperatures on the plains of Colorado isn't all that uncommon in April. One of the worst blizzards I ever encountered was in eastern Colorado (east of the Rockies) in April.

Secondly, and to your larger point, yes global warming really can lead to colder temperatures in certain locations. It has to do with the dislocation of warm ocean currents by ice melt.

For instance (and I'm speaking theoretically here), massive ice melt in the Arctic can feed colder waters into the north Pacific, causing the Japanese Current to turn south earlier and farther south than it typically does. Since the weather systems affecting Colorado are typically born over the Japanese Current, such a dislocation could result in storms leaving their usual track and heading farther south. Melting ice can also affect the location and power of the Alaska Gyre, which is also a big weather producer. We could see the same thing in relation to the Gulf Stream, where global warming would result in colder and longer winters for northern Europe.

I've heard this lame-ass argument before and while it is based on known science, it CONTRADICTS the global warming claims that are out there. If AGW is true, why are there so many lies about it?

How does known science contradict global warming claims?

And, why are there so many lies from the other side?

The fact is that both sides lie to support their positions and, in the meantime, climate change is taking place and we're not doing a damn thing to prepare for it. We're too busy arguing over the absolute positions of humans are causing it vs humans are not causing when, in fact, any rational person knows the number of people on the earth is at least a CONTRIBUTING FACTOR.

However, that perfectly sane position isn't good enough for either side and here we sit, watching the predicted effects come true while both sides try to "prove" their extremist position with junk science and outright lies.

Love how you claim that rational people should agree with you. The Sun is the major contributing factor of our climate and rational people doubt that the human population's contribution, if it exists at all, can overcome the influence of the sun.

The reality is that IF the planet is warming, there is absilutely nothing we can do about it.

 

[PredFan]

And why is it that if it's hotter than normal anywhere, it's due to global warming and is proof, but if it's colder than normal anywhere it's weather and not proof?

AGW is a scam, pure and simple.

Ignorance is bliss, pure and simple.

I'm pretty positive your ancestors were quoted as saying "of course the earth is flat, if you look far enough you can see the edge. The round earth theory is a scam, pure and simple."

You don't know shit about me, and your lame assed attempt at humor just shows that you have nothing.

Why is it that if it's hotter than normal anywhere, it's claimed to be proof of AGW, but if it's colder than normal anywhere then it isn't proof against AGW?

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL, your "logic" fails on so many levels its not worth addressing.

warming causes cooling----------duh, and light causes darkness. OK

Just because you fail to understand the logic, doesn't mean the logic fails, it means you fail. It's all about the average temperature, not whether one place is cooler or warmer than normal, that's called WEATHER.

Right.. And there is no empirical evidence that proves any climate shift is due to human activity.
Oh there is plenty of opinion. But no hard evidence.

Once again, you are full of shit. From the American Institute of Physics, the largest Scientific Society on Earth;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

The basis of the so called Greenhouse Gas effect was established in 1858 by John Tyndall of England. Svante Arrheniuos, a Nobel Prize winning Swedish chemist, quantified the effects in 1896, and made the first estimates for the effects of a doubling of the CO2.

 

[Old Rocks]

I've heard this lame-ass argument before and while it is based on known science, it CONTRADICTS the global warming claims that are out there. If AGW is true, why are there so many lies about it?

How does known science contradict global warming claims?

And, why are there so many lies from the other side?

The fact is that both sides lie to support their positions and, in the meantime, climate change is taking place and we're not doing a damn thing to prepare for it. We're too busy arguing over the absolute positions of humans are causing it vs humans are not causing when, in fact, any rational person knows the number of people on the earth is at least a CONTRIBUTING FACTOR.

However, that perfectly sane position isn't good enough for either side and here we sit, watching the predicted effects come true while both sides try to "prove" their extremist position with junk science and outright lies.

Love how you claim that rational people should agree with you. The Sun is the major contributing factor of our climate and rational people doubt that the human population's contribution, if it exists at all, can overcome the influence of the sun.

The reality is that IF the planet is warming, there is absilutely nothing we can do about it.

The reality is that we have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by 40%, and the amount of CH4 by 250%. The reality is that the cryosphere is reacting rapidly, melting the alpine glaciers around the world, and the Greenland Icecap. The Arctic Ocean will soon be ice free for part of the summer, which will lead to even greater heat retention by the open ocean water, and the warming of the permafrost areas, which will release more CO2 and CH4 into the atmosphere.

In the meantime, we have seen the extreme weather events increase by a factor of 2 to 4, according the Swiss Re and Munich Re.

The TSI of the sun has actually declined a bit over the past decade, while that decade has been the warmest ever recorded. We recieved a bit less energy from the sun, but retained a higher percentage of that energy, resulting in the warming that we are seeing.

 

[mal]

How does known science contradict global warming claims?

And, why are there so many lies from the other side?

The fact is that both sides lie to support their positions and, in the meantime, climate change is taking place and we're not doing a damn thing to prepare for it. We're too busy arguing over the absolute positions of humans are causing it vs humans are not causing when, in fact, any rational person knows the number of people on the earth is at least a CONTRIBUTING FACTOR.

However, that perfectly sane position isn't good enough for either side and here we sit, watching the predicted effects come true while both sides try to "prove" their extremist position with junk science and outright lies.

Love how you claim that rational people should agree with you. The Sun is the major contributing factor of our climate and rational people doubt that the human population's contribution, if it exists at all, can overcome the influence of the sun.

The reality is that IF the planet is warming, there is absilutely nothing we can do about it.

The reality is that we have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by 40%, and the amount of CH4 by 250%. The reality is that the cryosphere is reacting rapidly, melting the alpine glaciers around the world, and the Greenland Icecap. The Arctic Ocean will soon be ice free for part of the summer, which will lead to even greater heat retention by the open ocean water, and the warming of the permafrost areas, which will release more CO2 and CH4 into the atmosphere.

In the meantime, we have seen the extreme weather events increase by a factor of 2 to 4, according the Swiss Re and Munich Re.

The TSI of the sun has actually declined a bit over the past decade, while that decade has been the warmest ever recorded. We recieved a bit less energy from the sun, but retained a higher percentage of that energy, resulting in the warming that we are seeing.

^Ignores the Sun like he Ignores China and India...

Moldguy is just another Liberal with Misplaced Guilt who wants America to be Knocked Down a Peg...

Otherwise he would be Directing his Concern at the REAL Poluters on the Earth instead of going after American Industry with the rest of those he Links and Quotes with the same Agenda.



peace...

 

[RDD_1210]

And why is it that if it's hotter than normal anywhere, it's due to global warming and is proof, but if it's colder than normal anywhere it's weather and not proof?

AGW is a scam, pure and simple.

Ignorance is bliss, pure and simple.

I'm pretty positive your ancestors were quoted as saying "of course the earth is flat, if you look far enough you can see the edge. The round earth theory is a scam, pure and simple."

You don't know shit about me, and your lame assed attempt at humor just shows that you have nothing.

Why is it that if it's hotter than normal anywhere, it's claimed to be proof of AGW, but if it's colder than normal anywhere then it isn't proof against AGW?

I know PLENTY about you. Enough to know that you're willfully ignorant and pride yourself on being closed minded.

 

[Wyatt earp]

In the first place, snow and freezing temperatures on the plains of Colorado isn't all that uncommon in April. One of the worst blizzards I ever encountered was in eastern Colorado (east of the Rockies) in April.

Secondly, and to your larger point, yes global warming really can lead to colder temperatures in certain locations. It has to do with the dislocation of warm ocean currents by ice melt.

For instance (and I'm speaking theoretically here), massive ice melt in the Arctic can feed colder waters into the north Pacific, causing the Japanese Current to turn south earlier and farther south than it typically does. Since the weather systems affecting Colorado are typically born over the Japanese Current, such a dislocation could result in storms leaving their usual track and heading farther south. Melting ice can also affect the location and power of the Alaska Gyre, which is also a big weather producer. We could see the same thing in relation to the Gulf Stream, where global warming would result in colder and longer winters for northern Europe.

I've heard this lame-ass argument before and while it is based on known science, it CONTRADICTS the global warming claims that are out there. If AGW is true, why are there so many lies about it?

How does known science contradict global warming claims?

And, why are there so many lies from the other side?

The fact is that both sides lie to support their positions and, in the meantime, climate change is taking place and we're not doing a damn thing to prepare for it. We're too busy arguing over the absolute positions of humans are causing it vs humans are not causing when, in fact, any rational person knows the number of people on the earth is at least a CONTRIBUTING FACTOR.

However, that perfectly sane position isn't good enough for either side and here we sit, watching the predicted effects come true while both sides try to "prove" their extremist position with junk science and outright lies.

Not doing anything about it? who cares? an asteroid will wipe us out before then.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ok good, I thought he might have been serious. Because anyone with a half decent education knows that global warming is real and that day to day weather is not indicative of an overall climate shift.

Glad we cleared that up.

NASA proved there is no meaningful climate shift....

False.

True...The NASA 100 year study concluded that the Earth's avg temperature rose 1.8*C.
NASA also concluded outside of natural climate cycles there was no evidence that human activity is the cause of the temp increase.
In fact independent climate studies have produced no empirical evidence that the climate is influenced by human activity.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Solar storms and flares strip our ozone each time they hit us. Then it rebuilds. The wobble of the earth on its axis also contributes to climate shifts as does volcanic activity both above our oceans and below them. Then we have a natural climate cycle every few thousand years or so. And dont forget polar shifts in our magnetic field.

Libs are too stupid to consider all this and just prefer to blame farts and cars out of sheer stupidity.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I think the hot gas that liberals spew out of their mouths daily is putting us in the most danger.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I would bet ten bucks that Noah was screaming "MFing Global Warming" when he was on that boat with 300 smelly animals crapping all over the place.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so9o3_daDZw]Noah - RIGHT! (Bill Cosby) - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Tt_YpvwrFg&list=PL8078CC1C56780410]Bill Cosby - Noah Me And You Lord - YouTube[/ame]

Some of Bill Cosby's wisdom on the subject of climate change....ENJOY!!!!
This was from like 1964. My brother has this on vinyl.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ignorance is bliss, pure and simple.

I'm pretty positive your ancestors were quoted as saying "of course the earth is flat, if you look far enough you can see the edge. The round earth theory is a scam, pure and simple."

You don't know shit about me, and your lame assed attempt at humor just shows that you have nothing.

Why is it that if it's hotter than normal anywhere, it's claimed to be proof of AGW, but if it's colder than normal anywhere then it isn't proof against AGW?

I know PLENTY about you. Enough to know that you're willfully ignorant and pride yourself on being closed minded.

Oh...So if we do not buy into the global warming/climate change/climate adjustment/ban all fossil fuels mantra, we're closed minded?
Ok...Sure.

 

[thereisnospoon]

anyone recall the ice age that kept the Illinois/surrounding states in a deep freeze during the 70's? what caused that?

Cattle farts and excessive corn crop.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ok good, I thought he might have been serious. Because anyone with a half decent education knows that global warming is real and that day to day weather is not indicative of an overall climate shift.

Glad we cleared that up.

It's real in your mind because you want to believe it.
You want to believe it because those on your side have told you it is so..

LOL, "my side". You must be referring to the side of common sense and fact based conclusions?

No..Liberals. Liberalism is absent of common sense.
You support this climate stuff. You are just a believer.
Yet, you still use fossil fuels for your vehicle(s) and electricity...
That makes you a hypocrite.

 

[thereisnospoon]

And why is it that if it's hotter than normal anywhere, it's due to global warming and is proof, but if it's colder than normal anywhere it's weather and not proof?

AGW is a scam, pure and simple.

Ignorance is bliss, pure and simple.

I'm pretty positive your ancestors were quoted as saying "of course the earth is flat, if you look far enough you can see the edge. The round earth theory is a scam, pure and simple."

Straw man argument.
There is no empirical evidence that human activity has any influence on the Earth's climate.
ZERO...

 

[RDD_1210]

NASA proved there is no meaningful climate shift....

False.

True...The NASA 100 year study concluded that the Earth's avg temperature rose 1.8*C.
NASA also concluded outside of natural climate cycles there was no evidence that human activity is the cause of the temp increase.
In fact independent climate studies have produced no empirical evidence that the climate is influenced by human activity.

Let me check again. Nope. Still incorrect.

 

[RDD_1210]

Solar storms and flares strip our ozone each time they hit us. Then it rebuilds. The wobble of the earth on its axis also contributes to climate shifts as does volcanic activity both above our oceans and below them. Then we have a natural climate cycle every few thousand years or so. And dont forget polar shifts in our magnetic field.

Libs are too stupid to consider all this and just prefer to blame farts and cars out of sheer stupidity.

And tell us, where did you earn your degree? I would love to know how you drew this obvious expert conclusion.

 

[RDD_1210]

You don't know shit about me, and your lame assed attempt at humor just shows that you have nothing.

Why is it that if it's hotter than normal anywhere, it's claimed to be proof of AGW, but if it's colder than normal anywhere then it isn't proof against AGW?

I know PLENTY about you. Enough to know that you're willfully ignorant and pride yourself on being closed minded.

Oh...So if we do not buy into the global warming/climate change/climate adjustment/ban all fossil fuels mantra, we're closed minded?
Ok...Sure.

Yup. You got it.