yawn, same denying BS from a "large number" of so-called scientists.
Note that China, Saudi Arabia,and USA actually had the IPCC watered down and still it's too alarming for the deniers, with ice pack and sea levels and temps changing 100 years before predicted. That situation is what unsettles the science,not the deniers.
weather != climate
What of the 1 degree F drop in global temperatures over the past year? A fluke against a larger trend? Something else?
Never mind that scientist are now saying if the sun keeps up
it present "quietness" we are in for some serious cooling. Like
the cooling for the past year, that is 12 months for the believers.
Earth is cooling, offsets years of warming
global warming is all busll ..
If we are in fact entering a solar minimum like the Dalton or the Maunder, then a looooooot of people are going to die. China won't be able to feed itself, and could start getting a lot more aggressive.
And there's nothing we can do about it. There isn't any environmentally-responsible behavior we could adopt that would make the sun start spinning faster again.
I know here in the northeast the winters are not as cold as they were 40 years ago.
Never mind! Misread something
Wow... I wonder if next January will take a farther plunge?
Now as for the Northwest, I've lived in Oregon all my life except when I was in the military. Yes, these last few winters have been warmer, but we are talking global average. Not any single region. One thing we know that happens with climate change is the weather patterns also change. Oregon is warmer, but far more places are colder.
Bouton's, again, you look like a fool. Over and over, you drink the Kool-Aid that the Lemming Breeders supply. It would be nice if you for once, actually learned about the subjects you speak on.
All unbiased science on the subject shows the alarmists are wrong and has shown that for a pretty long time. I have taken a position on this subject at least four years ago. I am leaning more and at the same time, everything I have said is being supported better. That's because I understand the sciences, and have read the pros and cons of several works on the subject.
I just about had a heart attack when one of the most liberal papers in the nation actually wrote some truths. Here is part of an article led Climate orthodoxy perpetrates a hoax from the Oregonian, dated 2/25/08:
Gov. Ted Kulongoski's successful purge of George Taylor -- Oregon's former state climatologist and soon-to-be former director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University -- has a clear message for scientists: agree with the governor or you too will disappear. Don't hint that man-made global warming is the greatest scientific hoax of our time. It offends the governor.
-----
As a physicist, let me point out that our understanding of climate was not "settled more than a decade ago," as global warming alarmists argue. Science is never settled, as Albert Einstein spectacularly demonstrated.
Our knowledge of the interplay between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature has gone through three stages over the past 20 years. Al Gore correctly points out that early ice-core data gathered from glaciers around the world showed a very strong correlation between carbon dioxide and temperature over 650,000 years. Because carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, most of us assumed that it regulated global temperature.
By 1999, improving ice-core techniques produced a stunning reversal, showing that the global temperature changed many centuries before carbon dioxide changed. This proved that natural climate cycles were causing changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide, probably by affecting how much remained dissolved in the oceans.
Using new ice-core evidence, Caillon, et al. (Science, March 2003), concluded that "CO2 is not the forcing that initially drives the climatic system."
This should have convinced alarmists that their scare was unwarranted. But too many would have been thrown out of work, and too many politicians would have lost a hot-button issue. So they ramped up the alarm, relying on ever-more-contrived theories to explain the ice-core data.
-----
A very important break in this discussion came from The New York Times on Jan.1: "In 2008, a 100 Percent Chance of Alarm" science writer, John Tierney, describes how we are being victimized by a vast array of opportunists. They point out anecdotal evidence of warming and ignore counter evidence -- such as the fact that the global temperature last year "was actually lower than any year since 2001. "Governor Kulongoski should understand that responsible science is nonpartisan. We follow scientific evidence, not those lacking scientific training.
Forcing out a scientist because he won't go along with your favorite hoax hurts Oregon science and ultimately every citizen in this state.
WC, you know the really ironic thing. You have all these folks
like RNR that never have anything but save the earth and then
you have some folks like us to just ask the simple question:
how does all your BS save the earth? The really simply answer
to most of this crap is: Don't mess with Mother Nature. She
has been here a lot longer than us and will be after we are
gone. The answer is all around us, if people would just look
at something besides their stupid TV. Just go out into the
countryside and see what Mother Nature reclaims. We aren't
even a speck on the hindside of Mother Nature.
Yep, I agree. Still, I like to think green, I'm just realistic about it.
I would love to have a setup like president Bush has on his ranch. I don't know any liberals who actually build green like president Bush did.
Oh... He also added solar panels on the White House!
Hey, nothing wrong with being conservative, I live to
conserve, especially my bank account. But I cant afford
solar panels. But I don't consider it building green. I
just say it makes sense to save a buck, when the cost
is reasonable. Most folks when I was growing up
lived what they called green, except it was a necessity.
Cow manure was a staple on my Granddads place and
on most lawns. Everything was recycled, ever heard of
hogs, and slop?
Well, it does cost more to build green, and it is seldom cost efficient. However, anyone who is concerned about the environment should put their personal money where their mouth is when they have as much as these politicians do. If they don't, why should we allow them to with our tax dollars?
At least president Bush actually has green energy on his ranch. He paid for it!
I don't see any of the liberals calling for green power doing it on their own properties, do you?
They want "carbon taxes," but guess who owns those companies that profit...
Look at history, temperatures fluxuate, there are many do ented periods of temperatures rising at a fast pace and also declining. It's all political smoke and mirrors. Polar ice caps have melted before. It's propaganda to reach agendas that are finanically motivated in some way. It always comes down to money. Al gore sure got rich off of it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
