Despite what you read or hear climate change is just a communist pinko hoax started by the Democrats to make people afraid. Global warming simply cannot be.
[sarcasm button on]
64 Thoughts to “Climate Change Is NOT Real!!!!”
Comments are closed.
Archives
Categories
Blogroll
- 9500Liberty
- Bacons' Rebellion Blogspot
- Bearing Drift
- Blue Virginia
- Citizen Tom
- Counts of Monte Cristo. The
- Derecho, The
- Dixie Pig, The
- My Side of the Fence
- My Star Journey
- NARAL Pro-Choice VA Blog
- New Dominion Project
- Nova Common Sense
- NovaTownHall Blog
- One Libertarians's Point of View by Al Alborn
- Pete Candland's Blog
- Potomac Local
- Prince William Muckraker
- PW Conservation Alliance
- PWC Moms
- PWCPolitics.com
- PWCPolitics.com
- Red NoVA
- Shad Plank, The
- She the People
- State of NoVA, the
- The Jeffersoniad
- Townhall
- VEA Daily Reports
- VivianPaige
- WDGolden.com
- You, Me and the Lamp Post
All contents copyright Moonhowlings.net
Blogroll
- 9500Liberty
- Bacons' Rebellion Blogspot
- Bearing Drift
- Blue Virginia
- Citizen Tom
- Counts of Monte Cristo. The
- Derecho, The
- Dixie Pig, The
- My Side of the Fence
- My Star Journey
- NARAL Pro-Choice VA Blog
- New Dominion Project
- Nova Common Sense
- NovaTownHall Blog
- One Libertarians's Point of View by Al Alborn
- Pete Candland's Blog
- Potomac Local
- Prince William Muckraker
- PW Conservation Alliance
- PWC Moms
- PWCPolitics.com
- PWCPolitics.com
- Red NoVA
- Shad Plank, The
- She the People
- State of NoVA, the
- The Jeffersoniad
- Townhall
- VEA Daily Reports
- VivianPaige
- WDGolden.com
- You, Me and the Lamp Post
Climate change or Manmade global warming?
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/12/wheres-the-warming/
From the Forbes link at the above link:
Global greenhouse gas emissions have risen even faster during the past decade than predicted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other international agencies. According to alarmist groups, this proves global warming is much worse than previously feared. The increase in emissions “should shock even the most jaded negotiators” at international climate talks currently taking place in Bonn, Germany, the UK Guardian reports. But there’s only one problem with this storyline; global temperatures have not increased at all during the past decade.
The video does a great job of linking many different events, but does nothing to prove linkage.
Here…lets remove mankind altogether from the picture. Mars has also been having warming and cooling periods during the same time as the Earth during the last century. And Mar’s atmosphere is mostly carbon dioxide.
Here’s some other info: “This year is an extraordinary outlier,” said Harold Brooks, research meteorologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, Oklahoma. . . . But when scientists examine the most complete records available and adjust for changes in how tornadoes were reported over time, “we see no correlation between global or US national temperature and tornado occurrence,” Brooks said.
And here is a description about the recent weather causes: Too long to post.
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/energy/26807/#comment-232715
No predictions by the AGW crowd have come to pass with any predictability. AGW fanatics state that weather does not prove climate change and then proceed to point out any number of weather related situations, including contradictory ones.
Remember when the AGW crowd stated that snow would be a rare and wondrous thing, only heard about in history, in England?
Here’s a list of all things that have been said to be caused by global warming:
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
Did you notice that the flooding shown and then the flooding mentioned in the little computer graphic were NOT the same? One is caused by snow melt and the other by rising seas. Seas that are not rising. Snow that was a record fall.
The fires in Texas were arson. Does global warming cause arson? Yes its dry. West Texas is desert.
This is from a commenter at Watts Up With That? Its exactly what I wanted to say, but more concisely.
The climate goes through cycles. The Roman Empire grew when temperatures warmed up, and it could feed extensive armies throughout Europe. Rome fell when temperatures fell in 600 AD and the Empire could no longer feed itself. The cold actually triggered the Dark Ages throughout Europe. When the climate warmed up in the Middle Ages, life became easier and civilization started to make a comeback. The Vikings discovered Iceland, Greenland and Vinland (North America) when the sea ice receded during this time. Temperatures plunged again in 1450 triggering the Little Ice Age that lasted until 1890. By some accounts, the planet is still recovering from that cool down and temperatures are nowhere near where they were during the Middle Ages.
Within the greater temperature swings there are smaller cycles. The Earth’s climate was cooling down in the 1970s, triggering the famous Newsweek cover predicting an Ice Age. Most fair-minded climatologists believe the climate cooled again from 1998-2008 despite people like Phil Jones who furiously threw out the cooler temperature data (particularly from Siberia) because it didn’t fit their agenda.
Is the Earth warming? Maybe. Has the Earth been warmer or had more CO2? Definitely. Is the warming being caused by man? Hasn’t been proven, nor is there a consensus. In fact, consensus means nothing in science.
There was once a consensus that the earth was the center of the universe.
“There was once a consensus that the earth was the center of the universe.”@Cargosquid
But do you really want to take a chance that it’s not? Really, Cargo, you should try to keep your mind open here.
If you really want to see that there is no consensus, go here and read the comments concerning whether the numbers of tornados should go up, down, or sideways with a warming or cooling world:
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/05/are_all_these_tornadoes_being.php
The author says yes. Commenters say no and maybe.
@Emma
I am the center of the universe. Just ask me.
I thought everybody was on board with that…….
There are all sorts of clues that non-scientists can see or determine for themselves. My personal favorites are how much longer the growing season is here than it used to be, even 30 years ago. Diaries, pictures and calendars from my past tell me it is not my imagination.
My second non-favorite is that the glaciers in Glacier National Park probably will not exist in 20 years. Climate change.
Then there is that old stand by about how could all we do on earth NOT impact the atmosphere?
I have to ask what I consider an important question: Why is it so important that for conservatives to “prove” that there is no climate change?
@Cargosquid That’s a good place to be, Cargo. Less risk of falling off the edge 😉
I think it’s less trying to ‘prove’ that there is no climate change and more having the AGW prove that they are right – which they haven’t yet.
Cargo, your center of the universe comment reminded me of http://voices.washingtonpost.com/tomtoles/2010/10/05/c_10062010.gif
I love that one. It was on my cube wall until we moved buildings.
@Moon-howler
There is a simple answer to that question and it is also the same reason that liberals are so intent to “prove” climate change.
The debate over AGW is a proxy for the debate over the role of government in our lives. If AGW is “proven”, it provides the justification for massive federal regulations to limit carbon emissions to save the planet. In practice, it will allow the government (i.e. EPA) to intrude into every aspect of the economy and how we live in the “privacy” of our homes. If it is not proven, then the drive to increase the role of government will be stunted (it is hoped).
On the science front, there are still some very respected scientists who believe the sensitivity of the Earth’s climate to AGW is much smaller than current estimates. A very balanced diiscussion can be found at http://judithcurry.com/2011/06/10/lindzen-and-choi-part-ii/ .
@Kelly,
Thanks. I will check that out.
I suppose I have to ask, with as many scientists who conclude that climate change is taking place, are people saying it isn’t just to whittle govt. down to size?
What happens when we live on an uninhabitable planet because human beings were too political to heed warnings?
I don’t care if it is climate change, asteroids speeding towards earth, no clean water to drink, or other calamnity that threatens earth. I am not willing to risk it all because of politics.
Some of the very people who are saying there is no climate change are the very people who think the earth is only 6,000 years old.
I am not a scientist so I cannot argue from a scientific point of view. I do know there are changes. I don’t need to be a scientist to recognize some things…this happens if you live long enough. So I am to tell myself I don’t notice these things to satisfy someone’s political disposition?
Of course there is climate change. What is left is mad about is that they can’t use it as a political tool to redistribute wealth and make Al Gore rich.
@Kelly3406
” In practice, it will allow the government (i.e. EPA) to intrude into every aspect of the economy and how we live in the “privacy” of our homes.”
Exactly. A couple of years ago, I had to replace one of the commodes at Casa del Thomas, because the tank had cracked. Went to the local Home Depot and all they had were the “low flow” models. Salesperson tried to wow me with how many golfballs this or that toiltet could flush without clogging. I told him I don’t routinely flush golf balls down the toiltet. I prefer to slice them into the nearest water hazard…but I digress. I purchased one of the higher end models that “uses half the water per flush of older toilets”, and “meets or exceeds all EPA standards”. Now I have to flush it 2-3 times to get the stuff to go down…and I have yet to flush a golfball.
Moving on to lightbulbs. 100W incandescent bulbs are an endangered species. Compact florescent bulbs are what the Gub’ment tells us we have to buy. Things are a hazard to make, and a hazard if they break, because they contain mercury vapor. You really aren’t supposed to chuck them in the trash, and they cost much much more than a regular bulb. If you don’t like these, you can shell out $50 for an LED bulb. With my lesson learned from the “toilet incident”, I am buying 100W and 75W bulbs like they are going out of style….because they are.
Now, let’s talk “electric cars”. These are supposed to be a boon to the environment. I’ll admit that for a city dweller with a short commute, who shuns using public transportation, these might be great for “reducing our dependence on foreign oil”, but will they really result in a net reduction in greenhouse emissions? Several recent studies, including this one (http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10231102-54.html) indicate otherwise. Oh, and they only have about a 90 mile range….and they cost a bundle….and they aren’t really that safe if hit by a Natural Gas Powered schoolbus, or even a biodiesel mercedes.
Lead Paint. Remember that stuff? Banned in 1978. If you have this stuff in your home or other building, you have to go through all sorts of machinations to remove the stuff. The EPA says so…it’s for YOUR protection (perhaps they should append “People” to the EPA…the PEPA…yeah..that’s the ticket). Well 33 years after the ban, and an almost negligible problem with child blood lead-levels according to the CDC, the EPA is on the ball with onerous regulations placed on DIY homeowners and small rennovation companies, to protect “da Chil’rens” from lead paint exposure. Read all about it here: http://homerepair.about.com/b/2011/06/11/lead-paint-and-epa-authoritaahhhh.htm
The EPA is out of control, along with a whole bunch of 3 & 4 letter agencies. They are un-elected members of the exective branch, yet they act like they have legislative power. They create solutions for non-existent problems. They trample on the individuals rights to choose what they buy, what they eat, what they do with their private property. The constitution is just a “speed bump” to them. They’d flush it down the commode if they could…and have to pull the handle three times.
@Steve, I don’t know what agency insisted on those miserable toilets but I totally agree with you. Mine is an invention of the Devil.
Lightbulbs–I haven’t figured all the lightbulb hype out yet.
electric cars–look like clown cars. I haven’t figured out how it all balances out….but electricity doesn’t just grow on trees.
lead paint–that one I agree with.
Right now I am concerned over Va being # 2 in importing trash.
Moon,
Climate change is not the same as man-made global warming. Many AGW skeptics do think that the earth IS warming and has been since the end of the Little Ice Age in the 1850’s. Warming and cooling are cyclical. And its not just conservatives that want to “disprove” AGW. What we want is for the AGW advocates to actually prove THEIR hypothesis. That’s how science works. First prove your theory. THEN we determine the proper actions.
Yes, glaciers are melting in Glacier National Park. However we are having record snow elsewhere. One used to be able to walk across the ice to Staten Island in New York and the Thames River in London would freeze. Now…not so much. We used to grow wheat in Greenland. Now…also not so much.
Before the AGW advocates start making radical changes to our culture and economy, I want them to actually prove their claims that their ideas will work. And when organizations like 350.org put out a propaganda film like this, I don’t see anything other than an appeal to emotion without any science involved.
They state that warming makes tornadoes more violent while other climatologists state that it is cold air that does that. They claim that snow will disappear, but it hasn’t. They claim that floods will happen while claiming droughts will happen. I’ve yet to find out what WON’T be caused by man-made global warming.
So, let’s take their word for it. Carbon in the environment will raise the temperature of the Earth. So what do we do about it? The same people also want to restrict the only feasible source of energy – nuclear. AGW advocates also don’t seem to be worrying about the climate since they seem to jet around to the tourist spots for conferences. Al Gore and others have HUGE estates. Now they’re claiming that computer server farms are going to harm the world. But….they’re not logging off.
When THEY act like they’re serious, I’ll start taking them serious.
Living in a house with a drainfield and limited space for a replacement one, I’m all for water-saving appliances. I’ve had a Toto toilet for about six years and never had a problem with it. It uses about 1.3 gallons per flush. My dish and clothes washers are also water-saving. Sure beats spending another ten thousand on a drainfield.
We use energy saving light bulbs. I might stock up on a few 100W bulbs for one room where I read because I’ve got some vision loss in one eye and prefer bright areas.
My spouse’s brother spoke to some congressional committee about electric cars a few years ago. There are some innovative ways to use them on college campuses and other areas with limited parking spaces.
I don’t have any kiddos but do have nieces and nephews. I could cop an attitude and say that global warming will be someone else’s problem, but I’d like to err on being conservative with our natural resources.
I find it amusing that the same people who worry about government intrusion by the EPA or other agencies are supporters of intrusion into our bedrooms and personal reproductive choices. Even in today’s or yesterday’s InsideNoVa, we have Sideshow Bob lambasting PWC’s zoning dept. for not allowing a woman to operate a school for a larger number of students than her prior permit allowed – safety be damned. When it comes to private schools and safety issues, some of you guys might be surprised at the corners cut. Can’t have those confounded safety regulations standing in the way of profit!
@Cargo,
Hypotheses aren’t really proven. Hypotheses conclude based on data gathered.
If we wait to prove them it will never happen. I think it is the conclusions we must agree on.
I have to go back to logic here. How on earth can man use so many different products daily and not have the use of those products have impact on the earth?
I think the knowledge the scientific community lacks is to what degree we impact the earth, not whether we do or don’t. I find it enraging to have a bunch of people without science degrees saying that man-made climate change is a hoax. It isn’t a hoax just because it is politically undesirable.
I also see efforts to stop information gathering. That is when I say a pox on the house of anyone who tries to prevent information gathering.
1850…let’s see….what was significant? Second industrial revolution–combustible engines, mechanization in factories in Europe, Asia and the Americas. Wide-spread use of coal and coal products might be a contributing factor also.
I don’t like blowing off these kinds of things.
M-h, and we definitely can’t ignore the impact that development in China,other Asian countries, and India will have on our resources/atmosphere.
Cargo, Kelly and Steve – thank you. You saved me from spending a lot of time writing up much of this. As I wrote in a similar thread on MH recently, not buying the current dogma on AGW does not mean someone can’t be a sincere conservationist or environmentalist. I consider myself both. Evidence exists that shows rising temperatures (climate change) during some periods of history and falling temperatures at others (also climate change). The 1930s were a period of high temperatures and drought that eventually subsided. North America used to be covered in a sheet of ice miles thick. Climate change and fluctuations are a natural part of the earth. Only today do we find people trying to blame human activity for those changes in pursuit of various political and social agendas.
Follow the money and you’ll find the truth. If you want to know what the AGW movement is really all about, click on the following links:
http://www.generationim.com/about/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html
“I find it amusing that the same people who worry about government intrusion by the EPA or other agencies are supporters of intrusion into our bedrooms and personal reproductive choices.”
I was gonna go there…but stopped myself.
Censored,
You argument fails because of one word: “choice”. A woman can choose to have an abortion, or choose to carry and raise a child. I cannot choose to purchase a toilet that actually works as well as my old one. They’ve been banned by the EPA. After January 1st, 2011 I won’t be able to purchase a 100W incandesent even if I wanted too. After 2014, I will not be able to purchase any incandesent bulb e period. They will have been banned by the EPA. Doesn’t matter whether or not I am willing to pay extra for them, or pay the extra electricity cost…the sale of them will be illegal.
In my Lead Paint example, the EPA is mandating that any area over 6ft x 6ft, if it is to be disturbed an may contain lead paint, must be treated as a hazmat site. I would need to obtain special permits, and voluntarily submit to inspections, in addition to all of the other safety measures I normally take when doing any painting or sanding, like wearing a respirator. Nope…gotta meet some HEPA standard for particulate removal. This regulation is in place regardless of whether or not there are children living in the home. Non-compliance can result in $30K plus fines.
There’s talk about banning all transfats, following the lead of several state and local jurisdictions. Doesn’t matter that I work out all the time, eat my veggies and all that. Nope, gotta protect me from myself. Ban those nasty transfats. Can’t eat those.
If you want to go really “water saving”, why not switch to a composting toilet (I am sure this will eventually be mandated by the EPA, after being tested in Berkeley). This will be a hoot on a hot summer day when AC gets banned.
I find it a bit humorous that every discussion about liberty gets linked to a uterus by people who think this is argument is the Alpha and Omega of liberty and individual rights, regardless of the fact that there is another human life at stake. But I guess I am just being a hypocrite. I am “pro-life” afterall. What was I thinking? All rights flow from a woman’s uterus, and all personal liberty revolves around this spacial body. I see it there in the bill of rights…right after the 2nd Ammendment: “The uterus, being the incubator of all human life, and necessary to the continuance of a free society, the rights of one half of our people to decide the fate and future of the whole, and exercise in the disposition thereof, shall not be infringed…”
Now if you will excuse me, I must locate my plunger. I can’t find it in the glare of my compact florescent lightbulb. Must be buried under all that paint-removal equipment in my basement, and I’m too weak to move it from consuming all those transfats. Better go get in my battery-powered beercan they call a car, and go get one. Last time I went to the store, all they had were plungers for removing golfballs.
Steve Thomas, when you can get pregnant, come back and we’ll talk.
Sometimes, you just have to make sacrifices for the greater good. I pay for public schools without having children attending them. You may have to sacrifice transfats for so that other less active people will have healthier diets.
As I’ve said, I’ve found nothing wrong with our Toto toilet. You could live life a little dangerously and visit a salvage yard and still get a water-guzzling model. I’ve seen them in the fairly recent past at architectural salvage yards.
I guess I fail to understand why some people are so upset by change. I suppose they’d be happier with a privy or chamberpot.
As soon as that absurd, contrived hospital ruling goes in on abortion clinics, no one will be able to get an abortion there either.
Its hard to chose something that has closed its doors, whether we are talking light bulbs or abortions.
As for toilets, I have 2 real toilets I could sell.
The modern ones always have outside pipe contours that make it hard to even clean the outside of one.
Someone needs to build a better mousetrap with the toilet situation.
M-h, (snark alert) well then, those sinning women will just have to visit those back-alley locales. I’m sure the alleys are wide enough and door-free so they’ll be able to escape in case of an emergency. We know all abortions will instantly stop.
@Censored, I understand back alley abortions are on the rise. Actually, that dude in Philadelphia last year was back alley abortion.
Before abortion was legal, many of the people who were providing the illegal abortions were med students or people with some medical training, or so I have read.
Good snark attack. I wish I had thought of it.
M-h, I made what might be a mistake when we chose our model. It’s one piece – chosen for the ease of cleaning – so I guess a total replacement would be in order if a crack developed.
@Steve, I should have read further before I responded.
Don’t you think this is all about degrees?
As for the human life business….I am one of those people who doesn’t get all romantic over fertilized ovum in a petrie dish. Back to degrees, I see a huge difference in that petrie dish and a 9 month fetus. I might even call a 9 month fetus a baby, in fact, I probably would. But I should would not call the fertilized ovum in a petrie dish a baby. Not even close.
The uterus is a pretty important human component. If you want to talk rights, let’s go with possession being 9/10ths of the law. that fits on so many levels.
Moon,
My point was there is government encroachment going on everywhere. I’m ok with change, as long as the Constitution doesn’t get trampled in the process. I get especially testy when the encroachment is coming from unelected, minimally accountable political appointee hacks with an agenda.
M-h, I knew a couple young women who went the back alley route as well in the late Sixties. A nurse’s aide from the hospital was the “doctor” and then after a couple days and raging fevers later they went to the hospital. Other women just went out of state.
“Steve Thomas, when you can get pregnant, come back and we’ll talk.”
@Censored,
When you have sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, and have actually served in the same, come back, and we’ll talk about rights.
See, I can be dismissive too.
@Steve Thomas
Close… but no cigar. I could have joined the military but unless you’re talking about undertaking a rather drastic procedure, you’re not a woman. Military is optional – except during the draft – and we all enjoy the same rights regardless . However, you can’t become pregnant. You have no business telling other women that they should/shouldn’t have a child. MYOB. It’s that personal.
But you didn’t join. You didn’t serve, even when you could have. Therefore you cannot possibly fathom where I am coming from, regarding Constitutional rights. As we used to say in the Corps “you don’t rate”. So I am not a woman. But I am a parent. By your own admission, you are not, therefore you cannot possibly fathom where I am coming from, regarding bringing a child into the world, and the responsible rearing there of.
This is personal to me, but I am dismissing your standing only as a matter of illustration, not as a matter of principle. I am not afraid to defend my positions at the forward edge of the battle area (a term used by those who actually defend the constitution in the most literal state). I’m not going to jump in a foxhole and shout “Wrong gender! Wrong gender! Can’t even consider where they are coming from”….
We can keep this up all day if you like, or we can talk about lightbulbs and toilets and whether or not man-made global warming is real.
@Steve
Her husband did.
Having children didn’t change my feelings on whether abortion should be legal or not. But then again, my personal feelings and my political feelings are not necessarily the same. Same with 2nd amendment.
I will say that having grandchildren made more of an impact on me than having children….mainly because as a grandparent you have no control. When it is female you, you have control.
Then there is being a man. I will willingly admit I have no idea what fatherhood is like emotionally. I have even less idea what grandparenthood is like when it is your son rather than daughter. I will find out later this year. I am so tied in to birth from a female perspective having had my own kids and my daughter has children. I don’t have a sister, just brothers and brothers in law. I think I am trying to say that someone else not related to me has the safekeeping of a grandchild at this point in its life. This is unfamiliar territory.
Steve Thomas, my mind is made up regarding abortion. The female individual should make that choice. If her spouse or partner is in agreement, fine and all the better. But no stranger, pandering politician, neighbor, busybody should make that woman’s choice any of his/her business. Finished as far as I’m concerned. I don’t tell people to have/not have appendectomies, heart transplants, cosmetic surgery. It’s none of my damn business – other people’s choices for medical procedures or birth control are their business, not mine. I find it offensive for someone to even suggest that he/she should have any say whatsoever about what I do with my own self/body. I can assure you that pregnancy is not like being in the military. There is nothing equal or similar.
As for the military, you’ll have to get into a pissing match with my husband about which branch of the service is more patriotic and whether you were in a war zone or not and whether it was a real war or not or whose foxhole was bigger. I spent my youth protesting what was the war de jour – Vietnam.
Plant a tree – or hug one – great shade, helps prevent run-off, gives the birdies a home, and makes up for some of the ones butchered by developers!
Moon,
As I stated, my point was illustrative, not a matter of principle. I do not believe that an Amercian has no right to a point-of-view, or to express that point of view, simply because that person is or isn’t a ________ (fill in the blank). Perhaps as woman has a different point of view on abortion, because she is a woman. That doesn’t mean that a man’s opinion or position should be dismissed out of hand, simply because he lacks a uterus.
I am not sure where our views come from on abortion. I know where mine come from but that’s about it.
I know a few women who have had abortions. The ones I know seem to be ok with it. The women I have seen suffering decades later are women who have given up a child for adoption. Now that is just my personal knowledge and not meant as a grand pronouncement of any sort.
I have said several times on here, two of my husband’s aunts stopped speaking over an out of wedlock pregnancy back before WWII. They never spoke to each other the rest of their lives. The judgemental sister even snuck to her own mother’s funeral so as to not have to speak with her sister (Jezebel). Now life’s just too short for that kind of behavior.
I grew up in pre-Roe days. There were lots of quick marriages. Some girls went away for a while to live with an aunt or other relative. That disappearing act was very obvious. Some had illegal abortions. I knew of a couple. One of those girls ended up with some very serious post abortion medical issues. Everyone ended up knowing who it was. Small town. Of course, when I was growing up, getting pregnant was right up there with your family being wiped out by a plague (in the mind of a teenager.)
Could they go out of state for legal abortions? I think I was in college–fairly late college– before legal abortions could even be found. New York was the only place I heard about.
And those are just the people we know about.
Um……THREAD JACK! THREAD JACK! Be aware of a thread jack now occurring. Please fasten all safety belts! Violent swerves off topic will be occurring! Warning! Thread Jack!
Well, not really a jack, more of a detour….
Never mind.
I find it enraging to have a bunch of people without science degrees saying that man-made climate change is a hoax. It isn’t a hoax just because it is politically undesirable.
I also see efforts to stop information gathering. That is when I say a pox on the house of anyone who tries to prevent information gathering.
One, not all of the “scientists” that are stating that AGW is settled are climatologists or even physical scientists. Two, what efforts to stop information gathering? What are you talking about?
AGW is a hoax because the people advocating it have lied, hidden data, intimidated skeptics, provided propaganda instead of science, and overall, tried to convince the public that catastrophe would happen now!…..ok, NOW!…..wait….ok NOW!
Every prediction and timetable has failed. In fact, many have come forth stating that the models are flawed, and that the data used to make INTERNATIONAL treaties were somewhat…..weak. As in false.
The Little Ice Age was ending because the SUN was exiting a Maunder Minimum. And guess what, a Maunder Minimum is being predicted right now. Get your fur coats. If this is true, this is the absolutely wrong time to make energy sources expensive and weak.
http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2011/06/14/a-mini-ice-age/
What may be the science story of the century is breaking this evening, as heavyweight US solar physicists announce that the Sun appears to be headed into a lengthy spell of low activity, which could mean that the Earth – far from facing a global warming problem – is actually headed into a mini Ice Age.
[snip]
The Sun normally follows an 11-year cycle of activity. The current cycle, Cycle 24, is now supposed to be ramping up towards maximum strength. Increased numbers of sunspots and other indications ought to be happening: but in fact results so far are most disappointing. Scientists at the NSO now suspect, based on data showing decades-long trends leading to this point, that Cycle 25 may not happen at all.
Oops, forgot the quotations on Moons paragraphs above – the first two.
Cargo said:
A few have been accused of playing loose with data. There are thousands out there studying this phenomena. They don’t all have to be climatologists. All sorts of scientists contribute to the knowledge pool.
I don’t want to simply dismiss studies and fields of thought. I also don’t want to turn an idea into a pillar of salt.
As someone suggested earlier today, it is important that all countries control carbon emmissions and other pollutants. My friend Roger nearly died in Cairo the air quality was so poor. Their air becomes our air all too quickly. And the atomosphere envelopes us all.
@Cargosquid
The answer is simple. The EPA needs to regulate the Sun and issue fines to it.
Changing your light bulbs does make a difference and it is an easy change. We noticed a difference in our electricity bill when we changed all of our lights, and let me tell you, we have alot of lights in our house and only the two chandeliers are “old style”. Additionally, in summer time, when you are fighting to keep your house cool, the new light bulbs do not give off the same amount of heat!
Lets talk about how we USE to fuel our cars for a moment until a the government mandated a change due to our poisening of the air we breathe.
http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/publication_detail.php?id=216
I am no climate change expert, I will leave that to the professionals, the majority of which agree there is a rapid change occuring on earth. To even CONTEMPLATE the extinction of the polar bears in my childrens lifetime is unacceptable. The animal environment is mankinds best indicator when we are effing things up. Well, we are there people.
This site is incredibly interesting and gives FACTS on the melting of the artic icecaps. I strongly recommoned it to those who resist the established scientific evidence on global warming and mankinds effect on our environment.
The second link allows you to see the rapid change via satellite of the melting arctic ice.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20091005_Figure6.mov
M-h, yes, New York.
Elena,
If its polar bears you are worried about….the population has increased by five fold. It went from 5000 to 25000.
What we are trying to say is that AGW is not proven yet advocates want to destroy the economy to get to some magic number. Even the AGW fanatics state that if Kyoto was fully implemented, the only thing that might…MIGHT…happen is that the average temperature would be 1 degree less. ONE. DEGREE.
The role of CO2 has not been proven to be a temperature forcing agent to the magnitude advocated. In fact, scientists are now claiming that increased CO2 have increased the density of the world’s forests. CO2 is GOOD for plants. Pollution in Cairo is not CO2 but the pollution that we have eradicated, mostly, in our country.
“the established scientific evidence on global warming and mankinds effect on our environment.”
See, its statements like this that are incorrect. The AGW crowd have pushed this for years. The scientific evidence on global warming, climate change, the supposed dangers of warming, and mankind’s effect, is NOT established.
If CO2 is the cause, why is it that the ice record shows that increased CO2 shows up 800 years AFTER the warming period. And hey! We are about 800-900 years after the Medieval Warming period. Even CO2’s ability to “hold heat”, for lack of a better term, is not agreed upon.
If you want to see a fascinating site, check out http://wattsupwiththat.com/.
Pictures of the cyclical ice presence in the arctic, which is actually getting thicker now, are nice. Glaciers are melting. Snow pack is at record amounts. Some parts of Antarctica are heating, others are getting colder. Drought and floods are happening.
But even the UN has backed off of its IPCC report and the supposed signers have come forth denouncing the falsity of the report. They state that the report was changed AFTER they read it. The main AGW advocates use the same data. And that data is flawed. Then they use models based upon that data. Models shown to be wrong.
Again, none of the events predicted by the models are coming true. So they add more and more anecdotal claims. If you claim EVERYTHING is caused by your theory, SOMETHING has to stick.
“AGW is a hoax because the people advocating it have lied, hidden data, intimidated skeptics, provided propaganda instead of science, and overall, tried to convince the public that catastrophe would happen now!…..ok, NOW!…..wait….ok NOW!”
And yet I am willing to bet many of these same folks were rolling on the floor with laughter, when the recent “The world will end on May 21st” prediction. Silly little quaint misguided Christians basing their views on an antiquated book. We operate in the realm of science, and science is infallible and absolute.
Here:
That video links tornadoes to AGW.
Here is the rebuttal with links to NOAA.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/14/climate-craziness-of-the-week-grist-perpetuates-the-tornado-to-climate-change-linkage-myth/#more-41641
@Moon-howler
Re toilets –
Europe has long had toilets with tanks that have two buttons delivering
different amounts of water, depending on the deposit in the commode. Can’t understand why there aren’t seen here.
Cargo,
Thanks for the link , it was very interesting. Did you read all the articles? The one you posted does not disavow real climate change, in fact, it embraces the reality of climate change but challenges the idea that tornadoes should be immediately attributed to it.
Here is an interesting story linked to that website you suggested. You may find it interesting http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2011/mar/31/scienceofclimatechange-climate-change-scepticism?INTCMP=SRCH
Cargo,
You may want to fully read the articles from the blogs you post. This is the full explanation about WHY polar bears will BECOME extinct.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/international-conservation-group-global
“The PBSG renewed the conclusion from previous meetings that the greatest challenge to conservation of polar bears is ecological change in the Arctic resulting from climatic warming,” the group said. “Declines in the extent of the sea ice have accelerated since the last meeting of the group in 2005, with unprecedented sea ice retreats in 2007 and 2008.”
“The PBSG confirmed its earlier conclusion that unabated global warming will ultimately threaten polar bears everywhere,” it said.
“The PBSG confirmed its earlier conclusion that unabated global warming will ultimately threaten polar bears everywhere,”it saiid.”
Elena,
This doesn’t approach the question as to whether or not Global Warming is man-made, or just part of the natural warming/cooling cycle we all know has occurred throughout the gelological history of the Earth.
Little known fact: every single mole of Carbon that existed at the Earth’s formation, is still here (minus the miniscule amounts picked up from falling meteors and lost from being shot into space). Carbon has a cycle, just like water. Sometimes it’s in the atmosphere. Sometimes its locked up in a plant, animal or human. Sometimes it’s in its mineral or pure state.
@Elena
“unabated global warming”
Soooo, how did the polar bears survive EARLIER, HOTTER time periods? It was warmer during the Viking age and the Medieval Warm period.
Heck, with UNABATED global warming we all die. Even so, the article says nothing about the CAUSE of the pole shrinking. And, of course, there’s the new Maunder Minimum about to cause a new Little Ice Age that should fix any shrinking.
I, and other skeptics, have not said that the Earth is NOT warming. It might be. It also might be cooling, staying the same, etc. That is what real Climate Change is all about. Show me valid evidence other than computer models, flawed measurements, cherry picked sources, etc. Do the same with any hypothesis. Land stations to measure heat have been proven to be faulty. And in every case, those that push AGW, adjust temperatures upward, to “fix” said measurements.
I don’t want the government to destroy our economy based upon faulty, corrupt, political science. We get enough destruction just from the freaking incompetent politicians.
Carbon has a habit of turning in to things we like (diamonds) and sometimes into things we don’t like (carbon monoxide).
I am not willing to accept that man made things have no impact on the earth.