Global Warming (or not)
"(Climate change) is the biggest whopper ever sold to the public in the history of humankind." - the Huffington Post
An inescapable truth.
An inescapable truth.
Labels: global warming
posted by scalpel at 3:45 AM
14 Comments:
I'm not disagreeing, but I found this pic amusing :)
http://www.foundshit.com/pictures/funny/chip-giller-global-warming.jpg
While the question as to whether man has been able to change the climate unnaturally, I think it would be naive to believe we have no impact. We can't just go around throwing whatever we want into the air. The best example I can think of is the regulation of CFCs due to their obvious effect on the ozone layer.
Biological environments on every level are balanced and quite delicate. I'm not sure you can add a lot of one thing (carbon dioxide, but we're also adding all sorts of other chemicals) without having some negative effect.
Sorry, typo. "While the question as to whether man has been able to change the climate unnaturally is still controversial..."
Ah ... but Huffington Post usually do come up with gems like this one
Are you sure this actually appeared in the HuffPo? Holy shite -- they're usually so far up the Leftist Dem's asses they have to push tonsils aside to get a breath of fresh air.
Al Gore has really stepped in it this time. He could have spent the rest of his global warming career collecting money by spreading fear over events that were a century or at least half century in the future. Oh, but that wasn't good enough for Big Al. He's now told the biggest global warming whopper of his alarmist career:
AL GORE HAS GUARANTEED THAT THE NORTHERN POLAR ICE CAP WILL BE COMPLETELY GONE IN FIVE YEARS!!!
When I heard this I assumed it was a rumor started by skeptics to make Gore look bad. It wasn't until I viewed the video that I realized what Gore had done. Gore has started a five year credibility countdown timer ticking and it's up to all of us to make sure that he is held accountable and proven to be a fraud when his dire prediction aimed at drumming up support doesn't come close to coming true.
The mainstream media isn't going to let this video see the light of day because they, unlike Al, understand the precarious position in which he has placed himself.
It is therefore up to us to spread the word about Big Al's prediction. He must be exposed for the fear mongering opportunist that he has become.
To view the video, please visit the following site and click on the picture of Big Al holding up five fingers.
http://www.hootervillegazette.com
While visiting this site, you might want to watch a preview of the film "Not Evil, Just wrong" or watch "The Great Global Warming Swindle" which is found in the video section. Happy Viewing!!!
Are you kidding me? You're a global warming denier? Despite the testimony of pretty much every credible scientist? How... baffling.
I had been blindly accepting of the arguments that global warming is bad until...it was 73 degrees here in the upper Midwest on 11/3. Then I had a revelation--for us, global warming can only be a GOOD thing. I keep threatening to move south, but don't want to move. Let global warming bring the warm weather to us!!
.
Throughout history cold periods have been the worst times for humanity, warm ones have been better for human prosperity.
The CNN Meteorologist saying that the Man-Made Climate Change theory is "arrogant" is a great advancement in the cause of educating the masses with the truth. Hopefully more of the MSM will start speaking out. The word is spreading, tell all your friends and family, and tell them to do the same.
Gore and his Man-Bear-Pig. The politicians on board with this scam must be simply out of their minds.
For one thing, there’s plenty of oil and NG, we just need to drill for it and refine it. Also expand and improve nuclear, wind, hydro, solar and hemp fuel.
Can’t anybody talk some sense into Gore, McCain, Bush and Obama about how temperatures rise first, and THEN carbon-dioxide levels rise.
Carbon-dioxide doesn’t cause warming, sun activity does, warming causes CO2 levels to rise.
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
humans’ breath is poison
just one child hurts the world
worse than a jet engine
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
don't research all theories
put an end to all debate
silence all your critics
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
spread hysteria
wildly exaggerate
scare little kids not ready
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
keep people all worked up
about global warming
despite inconvenient facts
.
All real freedom starts with freedom of speech. Without freedom of speech there can be no real freedom.
.
The Great Global Warming Scam Movie
.
Philosophy of Liberty Cartoon
.
USpace
:)
"Despite the testimony of pretty much every credible scientist?"
There are a raft of credible scientists who've mounted educated, credible counter-arguments. There are scientists who participated in the IPCC's review process and have come out openly in contempt of the published documents, directly accusing the IPCC of ignoring countervailing data and glossing over issues that are not settled.
However, the GW crowd never addresses the scientific objections, they simply indulge in ad hominum attacks against those scientists raising their studied objections.
"Inquisition" any one?
If you read the the IPCC's technical report, it is filled with caveats as well as remarks on the limitations of the data collected, as well as direct admissions of not understanding critical components of the complex chemistry and physics that are encompassed by this issue.
Should we find clean energy? Yes. Should we find ways to reduce/elimate waste and pollution? Yes.
Is the jury still out on the "proof"? Absolutely. All I've seen to date is GW being used as another way for a special interest group to reach into my pocket for money.
The question isn't whether the earth is warming up but why. It's alway been why. And how much. And how will that impact us? Warming/cooling cycles. Is the warming inevitable to an ice age? We definitely don't want an ice age, but can we halt it?
The IPCC report can be read either way. There will always be nay-sayers. Science thrives on debate, on people asking questions. Thank god people are asking questions. However, the vast majority of pertinent scientists (people actually involved in climatology - not your local weatherman, not the mathematician down the street) agree that global warming is at least somewhat influenced by humanity. A lot of the IPCC report was re-written because of political concerns in favor of non-global warming concerns. (China, Saudi Arabia.)
I read a book about Flat Earthers recently - a history. It was hilarious - you could see both anti-evolutionists and anti-global warming deniers in them. People who will never be satisfied with ANYTHING.
Well scalpel, the post on the huffingtonpost link was amusing. As I am not a paleoclimatologist, I decided to send this link to a friend, who is. This is a guy that I used to race cycling with, and happens to be one of the most intelligent people I've ever known.
Here is his reply:
"Most of his information is well-debunked bullcrap. There are a bunch of loonies on the left who don't believe in global warming: Alexander Cockburn is perhaps the best known. They think it's a plot by rich industrial nations to keep third world countries from developing economically and competing with them.
Also, Karl Marx said that technology was always good because it drives history from the dark ages of slavery toward the Utopia of Communism, so any indication that technology might not be all good is anathema to doctrinaire communists. It's hard to give everyone a free lunch if economics involves hard choices and scarcity, so many doctrinaire Marxists assume that technology will solve all problems of scarcity, which is how "to each according to his needs" becomes a viable plan.
I don't know whether Mr. Ambler is a Marxist, but Alexander Cockburn is, and that reasoning drives a lot of his leftist antienvironmentalism.
Point by point:
The Mann Hockey stick figure has been largely vindicated. The big investigation several years ago confirmed that the hockey stick was good for the past 600 years, but chastised Mann for not appreciating the amount of uncertainty in paleoclimate records before AD 1400. Since then, Mann has gathered more data and extended the hockey stick graph further into the past.
It's not true that temperature preceeds CO2 in every case during the Pleistocene. Sometimes temperature preceeds CO2 and sometimes it's the other way around. What Ambler's leaving out is the fact that there's a circular feedback relationship between temperature and climate. CO2 did not vary in prehistory because Mastodons were burning coal. It varied because other environmental factors participated in feedback cycles. The key is that during the pleistocene CO2 amplified natural temperature changes. This amplification is responsible for the vast majority of pleistocene temperature variations and no theory of climate can explain the pleistocene ice ages without including CO2 greenhouse warming.
Water vapor is indeed an important greenhouse gas, but that doesn't mean CO2 is not. Water vapor's infrared spectrum overlaps part, but not all of the CO2 spectrum. CO2 has major absorptions that don't overlap with water, which means that it has a very important role in the greenhouse effect regardless what water vapor does. Moreover, water vapor is controlled almost totally by temperature, so increasing CO2 causes more water to evaporate, which in turn increases the greenhouse effect. This positive feedback from water vapor is responsible for roughly doubling the warming effect that CO2 or other greenhouse gases would have if water vapor remained constant. This has been very well tested experimentally by measuring changes in water vapor and temperature following the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991.
Regarding changes in solar intensity. We do believe the Maunder minimum was responsible for a large part of the little ice age, but it can't explain more recent climate change because if the sun were responsible for the warming of the last several decades, we'd expect to see three things that don't occur:
Solar warming would cause the tropics to warm more than the poles because they get the most sunlight. Greenhouse warming, on the other hand, predicts that most warming would occur in the polar regions.
We observe that the polar regions have warmed more than twice as much as the tropics, which points toward the greenhouse theory.
Solar warming would cause daytime and summer temperatures to rise faster than nighttime and winter temperatures. Greenhouse warming would cause nighttime and winter temperatures to rise more
We see nights and winters warming significantly more than days and summer.
Solar warming would cause both the troposphere and the stratosphere to warm up. Greenhouse warming would cause the troposphere to warm while the stratosphere cools.
We observe significant warming in the troposphere and cooling in the stratosphere."
Physasst,
Your rebuttal is interesting. I am a GW denier, and would point out that most of your friend's assertions appear to be based on old information, and omit the observed cooling of the last ten years. The cooling trend has led to the Warmists renaming their religion to Climate Changism. This is much safer for them, so that they will be right whatever happens.
Since my state made the national news on the 7th regarding extreme cold weather I would have to hesitate to say global warming is upon us. Besides, if it was , it would not be the first time global warming occured. A large volcano (like yellow stone) can create a much more significant impact on the environment almost imediately and there is (according to geologists) evidence of this having occured in the distant past. Maybe like the reversal of the magnetic poles it is just naturally time for this to occur and we humans need to stop thinking we are so important and so great that everything revolves around us.
Post a Comment
<< Home