The Global Warmers Have Lost the War

[Zander]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = AL Gore's Wetdream

 

[Zander]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = Human caused global warming!

So yes you have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW

But what if she was riding a dinosaur? what then? huh?

 

[Kosh]

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = Human caused global warming!

So yes you have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW

But what if she was riding a dinosaur? what then? huh?

Many already are.....

 

[MaryL]

That is good, I like that. As opposed to BSW. Bushes wet dream of WMDs in Iraq that weren't there. Speaking of deniers...Off topic, I know. but not really.

 

[orogenicman]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = AL Gore's Wetdream

Gee, an Al Goreism. How quaint.

 

[Zander]

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = AL Gore's Wetdream

Gee, an Al Goreism. How quaint.

 

[MaryL]

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = AL Gore's Wetdream

Gee, an Al Goreism. How quaint.

Reaching. Still. It's getting hot in here. Not made up like WMDs. Global warming, It is real as death.

 

[Zander]

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = AL Gore's Wetdream

Gee, an Al Goreism. How quaint.

Reaching. Still. It's getting hot in here. Not made up like WMDs. Global warming, It is real as death.

Sorry Maryl, Weather is not Climate. Just ask any Global Warming fanatic!

 

[westwall]

Some people post pictures of the chucacabra, others, angels. I don't care about the cherry picked graphs people post, it won't change a bloody thing. The weather is warming overall. And why, that is the question here. Mankind never used to be a factor in the history of climate changes through history. Solar or volcanism. OK. Humans causing co2 pollution, that is the wild card here.

No, the globe is not warming. It hasn't been for the last 18 years now. CO2 has been much higher in the past and global temperatures were lower than today. The same is true for higher temps and lower CO2 levels. Thus in the cold light of day the facts show us that in the trace elements in our atmosphere CO2 is not a player.

Why do you think the global warmers have tried so hard to hide any factual data? One other point....show me any program that the global warmers are pushing that actually reduces pollution. Not one of their programs actually reduces it. You merely have to pay more to do it. If you really think that they knew that what they were telling us was factual, do you really think they wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to actually reduce pollution?

Think about it.

You live on earth, right, so that we are on the same page here. I am not your enemy. It's just that you seem to cherry pick facts that contradict scientific reality. I like the Hilary Clown thing, that works well for you.

No Mary, I am not cherry picking facts. I am pointing out to you that the Earths climate engine is far more complex than anything man has ever created. It also operates on time scales that are so much longer that things happening today, will not manifest themselves in the climate for hundreds of years. That is the reality that the global warmists can not let you know about.

I agree, I am not your enemy (have I spoken harshly to you? If I have, please forgive me for that is not my intent) but in the realm of cherry picking it is the global warming supporters who are guilty. Not the sceptics. We present factual, empirical data and the warmers present computer models. What's worse, is when the computer models have been shown to be wrong, the warmers have altered the actual data to make it conform to the models. That is scientific fraud.

I use the Hillary clown face because I have met her and it fully applies to her. She is a despicable clown. Bill, for all of his faults, and he has many, I like immensely, but Hillary is a unethical woman.

 

[westwall]

Some people post pictures of the chucacabra, others, angels. I don't care about the cherry picked graphs people post, it won't change a bloody thing. The weather is warming overall. And why, that is the question here. Mankind never used to be a factor in the history of climate changes through history. Solar or volcanism. OK. Humans causing co2 pollution, that is the wild card here.

No, the globe is not warming. It hasn't been for the last 18 years now. CO2 has been much higher in the past and global temperatures were lower than today. The same is true for higher temps and lower CO2 levels. Thus in the cold light of day the facts show us that in the trace elements in our atmosphere CO2 is not a player.

Why do you think the global warmers have tried so hard to hide any factual data? One other point....show me any program that the global warmers are pushing that actually reduces pollution. Not one of their programs actually reduces it. You merely have to pay more to do it. If you really think that they knew that what they were telling us was factual, do you really think they wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to actually reduce pollution?

Think about it.

You live on earth, right, so that we are on the same page here. I am not your enemy. It's just that you seem to cherry pick facts that contradict scientific reality. I like the Hilary Clown thing, that works well for you.

He's a creationist. What do you expect?

When have I ever supported creationism you lying sack of poo. I am a firm evolutionist.

 

[westwall]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

Did you know that the termites outweigh human beings by 10 times? Did you know that you can fit every human being on the planet into the state of Rhode Island? Overpopulation? Not by a long shot.

 

[westwall]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Most plausible theory is an asteroid. You might want to heck your facts.



Alvarez finds evidence of dinosaur-killing asteroid
1980

In 1980 physicist Luis Alvarez and his son, geologist Walter Alvarez, both of the University of California, were working together on a geology expedition in Italy. They accidentally discovered a band of sedimentary rock that contained unusually high levels of a rare element, iridium. Chemical dating techniques put the rock at around 65 million years old. Coincidentally -- or not, that is around the time the dinosaurs died out.

A Science Odyssey People and Discoveries Alvarez finds evidence of dinosaur-killing asteroid

 

[orogenicman]

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = AL Gore's Wetdream

Gee, an Al Goreism. How quaint.

Wow, that even brought Frank back from the dead.

 

[skookerasbil]

Every poll..................Pew.......Gallup..........Rasmussen.........all have global warming at the VERY BOTTOM of the list of concerns of Americans. And this is out of 20 concerns or so each poll. ( I can post any of them up by request only thanks!!)

On this forum, you have a lot of AGW hard core members who have very few real responsibilities in life. If you had real responsibilities, you'd have some kind of appreciation for what most Americans are struggling with on a day to day basis. Global warming is so far off the radar, its not even funny!! Only mental cases prioritize boogey shit in their lives....the rest of America worries about real stuff.Almost invariably, the AGW k00ks have waaaaaaaaaaaaay too much time on their hands as is clearly reflected in the polls.

 

[orogenicman]

Some people post pictures of the chucacabra, others, angels. I don't care about the cherry picked graphs people post, it won't change a bloody thing. The weather is warming overall. And why, that is the question here. Mankind never used to be a factor in the history of climate changes through history. Solar or volcanism. OK. Humans causing co2 pollution, that is the wild card here.

No, the globe is not warming. It hasn't been for the last 18 years now. CO2 has been much higher in the past and global temperatures were lower than today. The same is true for higher temps and lower CO2 levels. Thus in the cold light of day the facts show us that in the trace elements in our atmosphere CO2 is not a player.

Why do you think the global warmers have tried so hard to hide any factual data? One other point....show me any program that the global warmers are pushing that actually reduces pollution. Not one of their programs actually reduces it. You merely have to pay more to do it. If you really think that they knew that what they were telling us was factual, do you really think they wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to actually reduce pollution?

Think about it.

You live on earth, right, so that we are on the same page here. I am not your enemy. It's just that you seem to cherry pick facts that contradict scientific reality. I like the Hilary Clown thing, that works well for you.

No Mary, I am not cherry picking facts. I am pointing out to you that the Earths climate engine is far more complex than anything man has ever created. It also operates on time scales that are so much longer that things happening today, will not manifest themselves in the climate for hundreds of years. That is the reality that the global warmists can not let you know about.

I agree, I am not your enemy (have I spoken harshly to you? If I have, please forgive me for that is not my intent) but in the realm of cherry picking it is the global warming supporters who are guilty. Not the sceptics. We present factual, empirical data and the warmers present computer models. What's worse, is when the computer models have been shown to be wrong, the warmers have altered the actual data to make it conform to the models. That is scientific fraud.

I use the Hillary clown face because I have met her and it fully applies to her. She is a despicable clown. Bill, for all of his faults, and he has many, I like immensely, but Hillary is a unethical woman.

Wow, now Wally is using the creationist argument - irreducible complexity. Well, I can see how this gambit might work for deniers. By arguing that "god must have done it", they can at least have an out when it all goes south and the populous starts looking for someone to blame.

 

[skookerasbil]

[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/bumfook_1.jpg.html'][/URL]



Who didn't do the Lemonade Stand thing as a kid? Once? Maybe twice until you realized nobody cares.

When I think of the AGW crowd, its like the lemonade stand kid who kept going out there day after day for 30 years with his table, chair and his pitcher!!

 

[westwall]

Some people post pictures of the chucacabra, others, angels. I don't care about the cherry picked graphs people post, it won't change a bloody thing. The weather is warming overall. And why, that is the question here. Mankind never used to be a factor in the history of climate changes through history. Solar or volcanism. OK. Humans causing co2 pollution, that is the wild card here.

No, the globe is not warming. It hasn't been for the last 18 years now. CO2 has been much higher in the past and global temperatures were lower than today. The same is true for higher temps and lower CO2 levels. Thus in the cold light of day the facts show us that in the trace elements in our atmosphere CO2 is not a player.

Why do you think the global warmers have tried so hard to hide any factual data? One other point....show me any program that the global warmers are pushing that actually reduces pollution. Not one of their programs actually reduces it. You merely have to pay more to do it. If you really think that they knew that what they were telling us was factual, do you really think they wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to actually reduce pollution?

Think about it.

You live on earth, right, so that we are on the same page here. I am not your enemy. It's just that you seem to cherry pick facts that contradict scientific reality. I like the Hilary Clown thing, that works well for you.

No Mary, I am not cherry picking facts. I am pointing out to you that the Earths climate engine is far more complex than anything man has ever created. It also operates on time scales that are so much longer that things happening today, will not manifest themselves in the climate for hundreds of years. That is the reality that the global warmists can not let you know about.

I agree, I am not your enemy (have I spoken harshly to you? If I have, please forgive me for that is not my intent) but in the realm of cherry picking it is the global warming supporters who are guilty. Not the sceptics. We present factual, empirical data and the warmers present computer models. What's worse, is when the computer models have been shown to be wrong, the warmers have altered the actual data to make it conform to the models. That is scientific fraud.

I use the Hillary clown face because I have met her and it fully applies to her. She is a despicable clown. Bill, for all of his faults, and he has many, I like immensely, but Hillary is a unethical woman.

Wow, now Wally is using the creationist argument - irreducible complexity. Well, I can see how this gambit might work for deniers. By arguing that "god must have done it", they can at least have an out when it all goes south and the populous starts looking for someone to blame.

Bullcrap. I never said that God crated it. I said that it is complex, and it bloody well is. So complex that your tiny little mind hasn't a chance in hell of understanding even the barest minimum. Your attempt to paint me as a creationist are specious, ridiculous, and prevarications of the first order. Every single post, that I have made in the creationism/evolution argument has been on the side of evolution.

You are such a pathetic representative of the AGW supporters. You truly are. A sad, pathetic lying sack of poo.

 

[orogenicman]

Some people post pictures of the chucacabra, others, angels. I don't care about the cherry picked graphs people post, it won't change a bloody thing. The weather is warming overall. And why, that is the question here. Mankind never used to be a factor in the history of climate changes through history. Solar or volcanism. OK. Humans causing co2 pollution, that is the wild card here.

No, the globe is not warming. It hasn't been for the last 18 years now. CO2 has been much higher in the past and global temperatures were lower than today. The same is true for higher temps and lower CO2 levels. Thus in the cold light of day the facts show us that in the trace elements in our atmosphere CO2 is not a player.

Why do you think the global warmers have tried so hard to hide any factual data? One other point....show me any program that the global warmers are pushing that actually reduces pollution. Not one of their programs actually reduces it. You merely have to pay more to do it. If you really think that they knew that what they were telling us was factual, do you really think they wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to actually reduce pollution?

Think about it.

You live on earth, right, so that we are on the same page here. I am not your enemy. It's just that you seem to cherry pick facts that contradict scientific reality. I like the Hilary Clown thing, that works well for you.

No Mary, I am not cherry picking facts. I am pointing out to you that the Earths climate engine is far more complex than anything man has ever created. It also operates on time scales that are so much longer that things happening today, will not manifest themselves in the climate for hundreds of years. That is the reality that the global warmists can not let you know about.

I agree, I am not your enemy (have I spoken harshly to you? If I have, please forgive me for that is not my intent) but in the realm of cherry picking it is the global warming supporters who are guilty. Not the sceptics. We present factual, empirical data and the warmers present computer models. What's worse, is when the computer models have been shown to be wrong, the warmers have altered the actual data to make it conform to the models. That is scientific fraud.

I use the Hillary clown face because I have met her and it fully applies to her. She is a despicable clown. Bill, for all of his faults, and he has many, I like immensely, but Hillary is a unethical woman.

Wow, now Wally is using the creationist argument - irreducible complexity. Well, I can see how this gambit might work for deniers. By arguing that "god must have done it", they can at least have an out when it all goes south and the populous starts looking for someone to blame.

Bullcrap. I never said that God crated it. I said that it is complex, and it bloody well is. So complex that your tiny little mind hasn't a chance in hell of understanding even the barest minimum. Your attempt to paint me as a creationist are specious, ridiculous, and prevarications of the first order. Every single post, that I have made in the creationism/evolution argument has been on the side of evolution.

You are such a pathetic representative of the AGW supporters. You truly are. A sad, pathetic lying sack of poo.

It is amusing that you believe it to be so irreducibly complex, considering when we were talking about it earlier (and had the ground water conversation), you said it was all very simple. You are a creationist. Don't pretend that you are not. We've had conversations on several threads about evolution, and from those conversations, your position was very clear that you don't believe in evolution. We've also had several conversations on atheism, and your religious beliefs were made clear there as well.

 

[Old Rocks]

The Global Warming Hoax's gold standard has long been the "Hockey stick graph". In Al Gore's Riefenstahlian propaganda film, "an inconvenient truth", the audience audibly gasps!! when the Hockey Stick graph is revealed. It sure looks DRAMATIC!! OMFG!! One can only conclude that (gasp!) Humans are ruining the climate!!! RUN FOR THE HILLS!!...RUN!!! ........ (but only after we advance our political agenda!)

But it turns out that the entire thing was a hoax. Just a "Michael Mann" made fable. There was no hockey stick. The data was fake. The entire statistical foundation upon which the Global warming hoax was built on was nothing but a miasma of lies, deceit, and malfeasance. They lied for $$$ and to advance a political agenda.

Despicable.

What is despicable is that you are one ignorant liar. The Hockey Stick Graph has been confirmed by over a dozen different studies using many different proxies.

What evidence is there for the hockey stick

Of course, these examples only go back around 500 years - this doesn't even cover theMedieval Warm Period. When you combine all the various proxies, including ice cores, coral, lake sediments, glaciers, boreholes & stalagmites, it's possible to reconstruct Northern Hemisphere temperatures without tree-ring proxies going back 1,300 years (Mann 2008). The result is that temperatures in recent decades exceed the maximumproxy estimate (including uncertainty range) for the past 1,300 years. When you include tree-ring data, the same result holds for the past 1,700 years.

Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperaturereconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).

Paleoclimatology draws upon a range of proxies and methodologies to calculate past temperatures. This allows independent confirmation of the basic hockey stick result: that the past few decades are the hottest in the past 1,300 years.

 

[jc456]

Meanwhile back in REALITY: the overall temps are rising, pole ice sheets are melting. I have seen the weather change from moderate to drying and warming here in the Midwest, overall. Sure, we get a rare gully washer or a blizzard at 5 below. Whistle past the graveyard. Deny the obvious. Bury your head in the sand too, won't change anything.

No, the reality is the opposite. But never let real facts get in the way of your political diatribe. The Antarctic is at record ice levels. The Arctic is at the same point ice wise as it was 35 years ago. There has been no increase in storm frequency or power. In fact they have reduced in number and power over the last 5 years.

These are all facts. Something that you ignore.

Vast Antarctic ice shelf a few years from disintegration says Nasa Environment The Guardian

The last intact section of one of Antarctica’s mammoth ice shelves is weakening fast and will likely disintegrate completely in the next few years, contributing further to rising sea levels, according to a Nasa study released on Thursday.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Arctic sea ice extent for April 2015 averaged 14.0 million square kilometers (5.4 million square miles), the second lowest April ice extent in the satellite record. It is 810,000 square kilometers (313,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 long-term average of 15.0 million square kilometers (6.0 million square miles) and 80,000 square kilometers (31,000 square miles) above the previous record low for the month observed in 2007.

Like I said, deniers have no qualms about making false claims as to what the science is saying. Which is why they don't publish in peer reviewed scientific publications, and publish exclusively on political blogs.

Predictions and more predictions and past predictions have all failed. Sorry but failed after failed does nothing to inspire confidence. The earth knows better