Global Warming is a Hoax*

13

Comments

  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    surferdude wrote:
    The science of global warming is pretty sound. The majority of disagreement is on how much of the warming is natural and how much mankind is responsible for. Addressing mankinds contribution takes money. Kyoto is just a trade agreement ensuring the bulk of the cost of addressing climate change is not borne by Europe. Don't confuse that with the science, the science is sound, the climate is changing.

    form my understanding, man's contribution to global warming is by and large because of coal burning power plants and cars.

    ok so we know the problem. solution is easy, almost impossible to put into action. in the short term anyway.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER Posts: 6,499
    I think everyone can agree it's getting warmer and that it's going to cause some issues to the weather patterns and ocean levels.

    It would be extremely wise to cut back on CO2 at the very least as it acts like insulation.

    Also, I was reading about soot filled dark pollution clouds accelerating the process:

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/08/070801-brown-clouds.html
    It's not getting warmer here :) It's actually been one of the coolest years I can remember. Now I'm not going to say that we do not effect the climate, or even that we don't substantially effect the climate, but on the other side of things, it's pretty ignorant for people to dismiss the fact that we are not the only cause of climate changes. There are so many studies out there that contradict each other at this point..............I think it's only natural that people are skeptical. "Hmmmm, should I make a drastic change in the way I live, pay $50000 on solar panels, lose money trading in a non-efficient vehicle that I'm still paying off for one that runs on water and sells for $20000 when there is no conclusive evidence that is available?"
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    I think everyone can agree it's getting warmer and that it's going to cause some issues to the weather patterns and ocean levels.

    It would be extremely wise to cut back on CO2 at the very least as it acts like insulation.

    Also, I was reading about soot filled dark pollution clouds accelerating the process:

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/08/070801-brown-clouds.html

    not true. this past winter was one of the coldest I have ever experienced in chicago. and it get COLD here. we had 7 straight days of temps not getting ABOVE ZERO. that hasnt happened in 30 years.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER Posts: 6,499
    I for one welcome the new wooly mamoths, beautiful canyons, and iceberg cavemen that the next Ice Age will bring.

    edit: i meant cave "people"................don't want to upset any of you feminazis.
  • fanch75fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    Solat13 wrote:
    I found this interesting that 1934 is now the warmest year in history and not 1998 due to a calculation error by Nasa and that 4 of the warmest years on record in the US were in the 1930's.

    http://dreadnaught.wordpress.com/2007/08/09/warmest-year-in-history-1934-according-tocorrected-nasa-climate-data/

    http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm

    http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/08/1998_no_longer_the_hottest_yea.html

    I know this isn't peer reviewed science and simply adding data and crunching numbers but somehow this is going to be dismissed on here ... lol.

    They were all paid off by the Bush family alive at that time.
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Solat13 wrote:
    I found this interesting that 1934 is now the warmest year in history and not 1998 due to a calculation error by Nasa and that 4 of the warmest years on record in the US were in the 1930's.

    http://dreadnaught.wordpress.com/2007/08/09/warmest-year-in-history-1934-according-tocorrected-nasa-climate-data/

    http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm

    http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/08/1998_no_longer_the_hottest_yea.html

    I know this isn't peer reviewed science and simply adding data and crunching numbers but somehow this is going to be dismissed on here ... lol.

    I think the numbers reflect USA temperatures only. It is called "global" warming for a reason.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    gue_barium wrote:
    I think the numbers reflect USA temperatures only. It is called "global" warming for a reason.

    you are missing the point. saying 1998 was THE HOTTEST YEAR ON RECORD is just another propaganda tool to scare you into believing we are all going to melt away.
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    jlew24asu wrote:
    you are missing the point.

    Was 1998 the hottest year on record in the world? Yes it was, and I think 2005 might have even tied it.

    What it the hottest year ever for the USA? No, it was the 2nd hottest ever.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    gue_barium wrote:
    Was 1998 the hottest year on record in the world? Yes it was, and I think 2005 might have even tied it.

    What it the hottest year ever for the USA? No, it was the 2nd hottest ever.

    and the 2006 winter in chicago had the most consecutive days below zero on record. at 7. sure was chilly for about 5 months straight.
  • Solat13Solat13 Posts: 6,996
    gue_barium wrote:
    Was 1998 the hottest year on record in the world? Yes it was, and I think 2005 might have even tied it.

    What it the hottest year ever for the USA? No, it was the 2nd hottest ever.

    But that doesn't change the fact that 4 of the hottest years in US history were during the 1930's. Surely America has grown and releases much more Greenhouse gas than back then and wastes much more resources. I don't think anyone is going to argue that point.

    Why didn't Gore have this information for his infomercial or was his science team too busy trying to build the case for global warming that they didn't bother to add up the data. That's the best thing about this error now admitted by NASA. It's strictly a computational error and numbers as far as I know are pretty much party and politically neutral - unless of course you believe in fuzzy math. ;)
    - Busted down the pretext
    - 8/28/98
    - 9/2/00
    - 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
    - 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
    - 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
    - 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
    - 8/2/07, 8/5/07
    - 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
    - 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
    - 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
    - 9/11/11, 9/12/11
    - 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Solat13 wrote:
    But that doesn't change the fact that 4 of the hottest years in US history were during the 1930's. Surely America has grown and releases much more Greenhouse gas than back then and wastes much more resources. I don't think anyone is going to argue that point.

    Why didn't Gore have this information for his infomercial or was his science team too busy trying to build the case for global warming that they didn't bother to add up the data. That's the best thing about this error now admitted by NASA. It's strictly a computational error and numbers as far as I know are pretty much party and politically neutral - unless of course you believe in fuzzy math. ;)


    but what about temps 12,230 years ago. no no, I mean 124,203 years ago. what caused climate change then? I heard it was a scorcher :D
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    not true. this past winter was one of the coldest I have ever experienced in chicago. and it get COLD here. we had 7 straight days of temps not getting ABOVE ZERO. that hasnt happened in 30 years.

    I was under the impression temperature graphs over the past x number of years clearly indicate an overall trend of increasing temps.

    some go high some go low, however the overall average is going up.

    Are these graphs a hoax now?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

    in particular

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    I was under the impression temperature graphs over the past x number of years clearly indicate an overall trend of increasing temps.

    some go high some go low, however the overall average is going up.

    Are these graphs a hoax now?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

    in particular

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
    No offense but I can't believe anyone uses Wikipedia as a source of factual information. I'm sure for this information it is correct but I still can't believe it's used as a reference. I understand the convenience and no cost of Wikipedia but it's not anything that should be used as a refernce. Sorry just a pet peeve of mine.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • surferdude wrote:
    No offense but I can't believe anyone uses Wikipedia as a source of factual information. I'm sure for this information it is correct but I still can't believe it's used as a reference. I understand the convenience and no cost of Wikipedia but it's not anything that should be used as a refernce. Sorry just a pet peeve of mine.


    Show me a better one... I'll gladly look at it.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    I was under the impression temperature graphs over the past x number of years clearly indicate an overall trend of increasing temps.

    some go high some go low, however the overall average is going up.

    Are these graphs a hoax now?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

    in particular

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

    I find it odd that temps seem to drop during the industrial revolution at the turn of last century. CO2 levels had to be at the highest point. and another drop diring the 40s when another industrial revolution took place from WWII.

    those pretty charts do show temps going up slightly. but that is such a blip in history its hard to fully understand its meaning.
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    Show me a better one... I'll gladly look at it.
    Go to the real source. When I want to make a point about poverty I find the original source of the data. Wikipedia is far from a factual source of information. It works by consensus which is far different than working by fact.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • surferdude wrote:
    Go to the real source. When I want to make a point about poverty I find the original source of the data. Wikipedia is far from a factual source of information. It works by consensus which is far different than working by fact.

    You do realize how Wikipedia operates right? It's basically the entire planet adding and scrutinizing and revising the content regularly with sources listed at the bottom of every article. Everyone get's their say to contest or agree with what is written.

    Personally I think you're over reacting.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    You do realize how Wikipedia operates right? It's basically the entire planet adding and scrutinizing and revising the content regularly with sources listed at the bottom of every article. Everyone get's their say to contest or agree with what is written.

    Personally I think you're over reacting.

    yea surferdude, wifi isn't unbreakable proof but its a decent source. after all this is just a message board. we arent saving the world.
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    Personally I think you're over reacting.
    For what you referenced Wikipedia for it's probably not a bad source. As I said it's a pet peeve of mine in general.

    I see people handing in research using Wikipedia as the reference. I figure why didn't they just put a stamp on their forehead that says "I'm a lazy fuck who doesn't care about accuracy".

    Wikipedia is the Cole's note of information. It gives nice background but you have to do the real reading yourself.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • surferdude wrote:
    For what you referenced Wikipedia for it's probably not a bad source. As I said it's a pet peeve of mine in general.

    I see people handing in research using Wikipedia as the reference. I figure why didn't they just put a stamp on their forehead that says "I'm a lazy fuck who doesn't care about accuracy".

    Wikipedia is the Cole's note of information. It gives nice background but you have to do the real reading yourself.


    yeah...only 24 hrs in a day unfortunately.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • heres an interesting article,

    http://www.etherzone.com/2005/bren022305.shtml

    comment welcome...(like that really needs to be said)
  • spiral outspiral out Posts: 1,052
    jlew24asu wrote:
    and the 2006 winter in chicago had the most consecutive days below zero on record. at 7. sure was chilly for about 5 months straight.

    Global warming is also causing colder winters.
    Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!

    The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    spiral out wrote:
    Global warming is also causing colder winters.

    I cant help but laugh. and I'm the brainwashed one? I'm the one who should watch more european news? they got you good dude. just admit you dont know whats going on. and neither do I. but I wont sit back and suck in all teh bullshit you see on tv.
  • g under pg under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
    Let's say global warming was a hoax does that mean we can go out and have a forest fire party, pollute the oceans or ravage our natural resources? I don't think that's the way for earthlings to care for mother earth, continue to recycle and conserve, conserve, conserve.

    Once it's gone it's more than like won't return in our generation.


    Peace
    Earle
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • heres an interesting article,

    http://www.etherzone.com/2005/bren022305.shtml

    comment welcome...(like that really needs to be said)

    That was a very interesting article. This is the kind of needle in a haystack material that keeps me coming back here. Most (I dunno 90%) of our sea floor is undiscovered, so what this guy is saying makes a lot of sense. We as humans can only account for what we are aware of.

    Certainly we know enough already to understand that it all goes back and forth in cycles.

    My only beef is that the dinosaur extinction could have been caused by a huge impact which would have torn a pretty large (miles wide?) hole in the crust would have released all kinds of gasses etc...

    That and the 20 years to doomsday...and the god references.

    Aside from that, he poses a very convincing argument.

    Interesting read.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    g under p wrote:
    Let's say global warming was a hoax does that mean we can go out and have a forest fire party, pollute the oceans or ravage our natural resources? I don't think that's the way for earthlings to care for mother earth, continue to recycle and conserve, conserve, conserve.

    Once it's gone it's more than like won't return in our generation.


    Peace
    Earle

    excellent point. and advice
  • g under p wrote:
    Let's say global warming was a hoax does that mean we can go out and have a forest fire party, pollute the oceans or ravage our natural resources? I don't think that's the way for earthlings to care for mother earth, continue to recycle and conserve, conserve, conserve.

    Once it's gone it's more than like won't return in our generation.


    Peace
    Earle

    That's when we just press:
    http://www.unicorn-dream.co.uk/destrier/fiction/Button.gif
    and start over manually...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • fanch75 wrote:
    Truthfully, I have no position on global warming because I have no idea. It's so predictably politicized and you're at the mercy of the deliverer of the information.
    yeah, it's sooooo political to take care of our planet. :rolleyes:
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    yeah, it's sooooo political to take care of our planet. :rolleyes:

    then instead of focusing on "global warming" lets focus on saving the planet
  • fanch75 wrote:
    They were all paid off by the Bush family alive at that time.

    lol...too funny..
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
Sign In or Register to comment.