Posts:
101
Registered:
Jan 16, 2004
From:
york,pa,usa
Age:
39
Re: Much more of this "Global Warming" and I am going to freeze to death!
Posted:
Feb 20, 2010, 2:42 AM
Low sunspot activity is one of the reasons for this harsh winter. I agree with you that global warming is a invented theory of the modern age. Let's just hope there is not a major volcanic eruption anytime soon. Natural polution in combination with low sun output could make this winter seem mild. Better stock up some beans and ammo dude. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
Re: Much more of this "Global Warming" and I am going to freeze to death!
Posted:
Feb 20, 2010, 9:21 AM
you're describing weather; the actual scientists are concerned about climate, specifically climate change. did you know that there is a difference between weather and climate?
It's no use going back to yesterday, because I was a different person then.
Re: Much more of this
Posted:
Feb 20, 2010, 3:50 PM
Sorry in advance for the long post.
I have read about the '70s global ice-age threat, and it is eerily similar to what we have now but on a smaller scale.
Did you know that the earth's climate has actually been cooling since 1998? Did you know that at the same time we have steadily been increasing CO2 emissions? Did you know that examinations of fossil records going back millions of years show zero examples of CO2 increases preceding a warming trend (they always lag behind)? Did you know that there is no historical correlation between CO2 increases and global warming?
Historical records and fossil evidence show that at times of cooling, crops fail, wars increase, poverty reigns, deserts expand, and civilizations fall. At times of increased temperature, food is more plentiful, tropical rain bands expand into the temperate zones, populations increase, poverty goes down, wars decrease, and civilizations prosper. The idea that temperature increase is necessarily bad is just plain wrong. There have been many times in history when temps have been 3- 5 degrees hotter and things were just peachy.
Did you know that the Global Summary report for policy makers (the famed consensus of 2500 scientists) was edited to remove the equivocality around linking CO2 to global warming. The original draft said that no link had been found, this was then edited to say the a link had been found, and that we should act urgently before it is too late. This was not edited by a person of science, but by someone with an agenda. We have been suffering the consequences of this ever since.
Having said all that, and in response to your comments Jack, I would not extend this to suggest that governments have taken this on board in order to find another way to tax us. Taxes are unpopular and the money is only to fund Cap and Trade schemes and other initiatives. Rather, the politicians make the same use of all this as they make of all major 'imperatives', they see which way the wind blows and then use it to generate votes via quasi-environmental policy making. While there are many within politics who are passionate about the environment, unfortunately they are being used.
This whole movement is not a scientific one but a political one initiated by environmental activists and driven now by political expendiancy. Once politics was mixed into the science, the science was corrupted. It now takes a distant back seat to the exigencies of the politcal contest. Truth will always be the first casualty of war, and the truth about this from a scientific perspective is very different from the public perception.
The result of all this is that the public has now had a near total shift to belief in global warming. My concern is that this will eventually cause a major backlash against science and scientists when eventually people start to realize the world is not getting warmer. People will blame us for this and politicians will say they acted on advice from scientists. Well let me assure you that there is no 'concensus' among scientists as is often claimed. Unpolitisized science does not work on the basis of a show of hands, it works on evidence. As I said, the original summary report (and subsequent reports) was edited and manipulated to remove any statement that suggests the evidence is inconclusive. There are millions of scientists who now cannot get funding for projects unless they are pro-global warming. This situation is a tragedy for science and for the human race.
Please take the time to read Ian Plimer's book 'Heaven & Earth' for more on this. I have met this man personally and I can attest to his non-crackpottedness.
Your cold snap in the USA may or may not have anything to do with global warming or cooling, sunspots or volcanoes, but I think the last thing the world economy needs - especially in the USA - is an economic impost to satisfy a political / environmental myth.
Sorry, but I just had to say something. I feel much better now.
Have a nice day
Message was edited by: alisontate at Feb 21, 2010 9:25 AM
> Did you know that there is > no historical correlation between CO2 increases and > global warming? That doesn't seem surprising to me. If you believe that the C02 increase is coming from human activity, then there would not be a historical correlation?
> Historical records and fossil evidence show that at > times of cooling, crops fail, wars increase, poverty > reigns, deserts expand, and civilizations fall. At > times of increased temperature, food is more > plentiful, tropical rain bands expand into the > temperate zones, populations increase, poverty goes > down, wars decrease, and civilizations prosper. The > idea that temperature increase is necessarily bad is > just plain wrong. There have been many times in > history when temps have been 3- 5 degrees hotter and > things were just peachy. 3-5 degrees hotter doesn't seem like much, but just a few degrees could do quite a lot of damage. 1. melt ice sheets increasing sea levels drastically, affecting millions of ppl worldwide 2. DECREASE food production globally 3. much of amazon would be lost to drought 4. decrease water availability and on and on http://www.actoncopenhagen.decc.gov.uk/content/en/embeds/flash/4-degrees-large-map-final
> > Did you know that the Global Summary report for > policy makers (the famed consensus of 2500 > scientists) was edited to remove the equivocality > around linking CO2 to global warming. The original > draft said that no link had been found, this was then > edited to say the a link had been found, and that we > should act urgently before it is too late. This was > not edited by a person of science, but by someone > with an agenda. We have been suffering the > consequences of this ever since.
i did not know that. where did you learn it?
> Having said all that, and in response to your > comments Jack, I would not extend this to suggest > that governments have taken this on board in order to > find another way to tax us. Taxes are unpopular and > the money is only to fund Cap and Trade schemes and > other initiatives. Rather, the politicians make the > same use of all this as they make of all major > 'imperatives', they see which way the wind blows and > then use it to generate votes via quasi-environmental > policy making. While there are many within politics > who are passionate about the environment, > unfortunately they are being used.
i think i would mostly agree with that, many politicians suck.
> This whole movement is not a scientific one but a > political one initiated by environmental activists > and driven now by political expendiancy. Once > politics was mixed into the science, the science was > corrupted. It now takes a distant back seat to the > exigencies of the politcal contest. Truth will always > be the first casualty of war, and the truth about > this from a scientific perspective is very different > from the public perception.
i don't agree with that, i don't think the science has been corrupted. that is not to say i don't believe science CAN'T be corrupted or politized.
> The result of all this is that the public has now had > a near total shift to belief in global > warming. My concern is that this will eventually > cause a major backlash against science and scientists > when eventually people start to realize the world is > not getting warmer. People will blame us for this and > politicians will say they acted on advice from > scientists. Well let me assure you that there is no > 'concensus' among scientists as is often claimed.
> Unpolitisized science does not work on the basis of a > show of hands, it works on evidence. As I said, the > original summary report (and subsequent reports) was > edited and manipulated to remove any statement that > suggests the evidence is inconclusive. There are > millions of scientists who now cannot get funding for > projects unless they are pro-global warming. This > situation is a tragedy for science and for the human > race.
i'm sure there are some scientists who can't get funding, but millions? really?
> Please take the time to read Ian Plimer's book > 'Heaven & Earth' for more on this. I have met this > man personally and I can attest to his > non-crackpottedness.
Posts:
101
Registered:
Jan 16, 2004
From:
york,pa,usa
Age:
39
Re: Much more of this "Global Warming" and I am going to freeze to death!
Posted:
Feb 25, 2010, 2:54 AM
There is different kinds of liars. blatant..hmm then there is statisticians. People who manipulate data to gain their agenda. 2009 was a cold year here in the northeast. I hope for some warm weather soon. I am sure some number cruncher will tell me how warm it is as record snow hits again this week.
Posts:
1,032
Registered:
Dec 16, 2001
From:
Powell, OH
Age:
37 Home page
Re: Much more of this "Global Warming" and I am going to freeze to death!
Posted:
Feb 25, 2010, 3:25 PM
I agree, there are all kinds of liars! And you can tweak statistics to make it sound like you are proving anything. I'm not sure who or what in this thread you are referring to though.
Record snow doesn't mean it is necessarily a colder year, although I know it has been a colder winter this year here in the US. Here is an interesting article in the NY times about it. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/weekinreview/10chang.html
Posts:
101
Registered:
Jan 16, 2004
From:
york,pa,usa
Age:
39
Re: Much more of this "Global Warming" and I am going to freeze to death!
Posted:
Mar 3, 2010, 3:39 AM
hmm I was thinking a little.. the Earth is mostly a molten orb of lava carefully balanced with millions of cubic miles of water..and then there is a so called carbon influence? It seems impossible to heat it? when it regulates itself..I do not think it is possible to create enough btu's from any kind of burning to effect much of anything..I may be wrong..but who knows..
