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.
Another attempted hit by the infamous Kirk....
Because GD I can't find anything wrong with the facts of the article so we attack the messenger....
While there isn't 100% correlation between rises and falls(temperature and solar activity), it is pretty damn close. While, CO2 emmissions and temperature are almost completely devoid of any relation at all.
LMAO....LMAO....LMAO....LMAO.....
Wonder who would have more credibility? StopExxon.org(which has a adversial name to begin with) or a leading scientist studying the effects of carbon dioxide? You do realize, humans breathing is also causing global warming correct. Every time you breathe out you expel carbon dioxide from your lungs.
I guess Dr. Ballings is fine huh, since you didn't try to smear his name. Well he concludes the same thing as Idso. So go to foolthefoolsowecanlineourpockets.org and find some attempted smears on him too as well.
From the Royal Society report.....
In 2001, the United States National Academy of Sciences was commissioned by the Bush administration
to assess the current understanding of global climate change. Its report, published in June 2001, stated:
The IPCCs conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been
due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the
scientific community on this issue.
I am always amused by that NOAA graph that has been posted a gazillion times now by global warming religionists.
What they don't every quite get around to mentioning however is how the data was obtained to produce it.
The NOAA has been tracking global temperatures for just under 30 years. That's 30 years on a planet that has been around for billions of years!!!! Not even a blink in the overall big picture and there is no effort to consider the changes in urbanization, changes in land use, etc. all that has to be factored into the mix to get a meaningful reading.
I don't expect Kirk to accept that. But hopefully those just coming on board in the debate will be willing to look at all the scientific studies and opinion out there before you jump on the religionists' band wagon.
I am always amused by that NOAA graph that has been posted a gazillion times now by global warming religionists.
What they don't every quite get around to mentioning however is how the data was obtained to produce it.
The NOAA has been tracking global temperatures for just under 30 years. That's 30 years on a planet that has been around for billions of years!!!! Not even a blink in the overall big picture and there is no effort to consider the changes in urbanization, changes in land use, etc. all that has to be factored into the mix to get a meaningful reading.
I don't expect Kirk to accept that. But hopefully those just coming on board in the debate will be willing to look at all the scientific studies and opinion out there before you jump on the religionists' band wagon.
Yep, and all those temps on the graph past 30 years or so, are what we call estimates. Not to mention even the whole graph only goes back about 200 years. those who do not think would assume it was always low before 1880, but they would be making one hell of an assumption, and we all know what they say about assumptions.
When was the last time the North Pole was ice free?
LOL keep asking that question, I could care less, as I said nothing about the north pole or Ice.
Fact is we do not know for sure now do we. Another fact is you just ask that same question when ever you do not want to take on what people have actually said about your other posts. It is called deflection!!
When was the last time the North Pole was ice free?
When was the last time you actually debated people instead of deflecting?
I think a relevant rebuttal would be, in the iota of recorded human observation, how the hell would you know the asnwer otherwise?
So the answer is, not within recorded history.
And we know this for sure how? have we been monitoring the north pole for Ice levels since the start of time?
Yep, and all those temps on the graph past 30 years or so, are what we call estimates. Not to mention even the whole graph only goes back about 200 years. those who do not think would assume it was always low before 1880, but they would be making one hell of an assumption, and we all know what they say about assumptions.
And I assume many of you have noticed the WIDE margins of error in most of their graphs...It reminds me of the hurricane center when they post the "cone of uncertainty" and then show you about 30 projected paths...
