Thread: Any doubts about Climate Change?

No i was going more down the line of taking away the protection of the Earth, soon we will be left with just a shell.

Originally Posted by beazalbob69

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

how we are raping the planet of natural resources such as coal gas oil etc

The world is doing that. I don't think anyone denies that.

What are we doing with it? Burning it mostly. Where is it all going? Into the atmosphere. What is it doing up there? Trapping heat.

No politics needed.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

all this cold weather

Polar vortex jet stream air current forced south over the North American continent by higher temperatures in the Arctic.

Covered at length several times before.

Check this out - Farming moves north with the temperatures.

A century ago, corn was not a viable crop above North Dakota’s southern third. But an average temperature rise of 2.7 degrees over that period has let North Dakota farmers grow feed corn up to the Canadian border. The growing season there is three weeks longer. In farming, that’s huge.

For similar reasons, soybeans now grow in upstate New York. And though the state’s Finger Lakes region has produced hardy wine grapes for a long time, milder winters have enabled it to nurture fancier European grape varieties.

As for New England, the hope is that some centuries-old farms will become profitable, as well as picturesque. Agriculture never disappeared there, but it had to concentrate on dairy products and niche crops, such as cranberries and wild blueberries. Warmer weather opens new possibilities. For example, peaches may become a commercial crop in Maine.

A paper out of Brandeis University predicts that by 2030, the New England region could have three times as much farmland as it does now, thanks to warmer weather. Should that happen, New England may end up producing half its food."

Farming moves north with the temperatures | Opinion | The Seattle Times

That's terrible! What's Al Gore gonna say about that!

& no, the Polar Bears are not gonna go extinct...

^ Umm you just posted an article that reinforces that climate change is happening. Good job dippy.

I love how you cherry picked only certain paragraphs as well. You skipped this one;

"Global warming seems to be also changing the distribution of rainfall. The Northwest, central states and the South are seeing more rain and snow than they did a century ago. The Rockies and most of the Southwest are seeing less."

The records keep getting broken.

March 2015 Easily Set The Record For Hottest March Ever Recorded

This was easily the hottest March — and hottest January-to-March — on record, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA’s latest monthly report makes clear Mother Nature is just getting warmed up:

• March 2015 was not only the hottest March in their 135-year of keeping records, it beat “the previous record of 2010 by 0.09°F (0.05°C).”

• January-to-March was not only the hottest start to any year on record, it also beat “the previous record of 2002 by 0.09°F.”

• March was so warm that only two other months ever had a higher “departure from average” (i.e. temperature above the norm), February 1998 and January 2007, and they only beat March by “just 0.01°C (0.02°F).”

• Arctic sea ice hit its smallest March extent since records began in 1979.

The human-caused global warming trend that made 2014 the hottest year on record is continuing. We may even be witnessing the start of the long-awaited jump in global temperatures.

Poll: 74% Of Americans “Never” Talk About Global Warming…

A whopping 74 percent of Americans "never" or "rarely" discuss global warming, while just 26 percent of Americans talk about it "often" or "occasionally," according to a national survey from the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication released Monday.

And 25 percent of Americans say people they know never talk about global warming at all, despite the fact that a majority of the public believes the planet is heating up and the scientific consensus that global warming is driven primarily by human activity.

The lack of buzz may signal apathy from the American public when it comes time to talk about climate change. People tend to be far less concerned about climate change than they are about other threats that they believe are more immediate, like a flailing economy or terrorist attack.

The survey results are based on interviews with 1,263 Americans ages 18 and older with a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Heh...bad news for the fear mongers, eh?

Americans Don?t Talk About Global Warming Very Often - NationalJournal.com

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

The lack of buzz may signal apathy from the American public when it comes time to talk about climate change. People tend to be far less concerned about climate change than they are about other threats that they believe are more immediate, like a flailing economy or terrorist attack.

Strange how most normal people tend to be concerned about real tangible threats, rather than imaginary ones. There will of course always be that part of the population fuming, fretting and having fits about things like the end of civilization and the impending end of the world........

The imagined threats often outnumber the real ones by a considerable margin, so there's always lots to fret about.... each generation tends to come up with new threats as the old ones get too stale to sell....... Even threats have a "best before" date....

As you scan back through the decades you can see the changing threats and how they dissolve and evolve into new ones as we go along. It's a bit like dress fashion or hairstyle....and usually just about as important.....

Originally Posted by koman

Strange how most normal people tend to be concerned about real tangible threats, rather than imaginary ones.

Strange how the old adage that ignorance is bliss is so true on this subject on this board.

When the overwhelming evidence from the global scientific community warns us about what is happening, and what every scientific measurement gives us reason to believe will get worse, is relegated to "imaginary", then you know you're dealing with a flat-earth conspiracy wack. Fortunately the process of evolution--another scientific theory they try to refute with a magic book called the Bible--will see to their demise.

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by koman

Strange how most normal people tend to be concerned about real tangible threats, rather than imaginary ones.

When the overwhelming evidence from the global scientific community warns us .

Oh but it doesn't. The so-called Climate Scientists Al Gore et. al. cite for their grand hoax are second or third tier. These quacks are only able to engage in the pseudo science of "Climate Engineering" rather than say those top physicists who choose to go into the 'hard' sciences.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Oh but it doesn't.

Yes it is and you have never posted one piece of credible evidence to dispute it. Your posts have been debunked and discredited numerous times over on this thread. In most case the links and articles you provide the sources come from people connected to big oil whom are not even scientists.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

The so-called Climate Scientists Al Gore et. al. cite for their grand hoax are second or third tier.

Al Gore is just a figure head that right wing morons use he didnt "invent" climate change he was just using his position of prominence to bring attention to the issue. Bringing him up is nothing but hot air.

With regards to the 98% of climate scientists who are saying that global warming is real they are hardly second tier. That comment displays extreme stupidity and ignorance. It shows how utterly lost in the right wing fever swamps you really are. You swallow whatever your handlers feed you without question.

Since when did the scientists at organizations like NASA and NOAA become second tier?

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by koman

Strange how most normal people tend to be concerned about real tangible threats, rather than imaginary ones.

Strange how the old adage that ignorance is bliss is so true on this subject on this board.

When the overwhelming evidence from the global scientific community warns us about what is happening, and what every scientific measurement gives us reason to believe will get worse, is relegated to "imaginary", then you know you're dealing with a flat-earth conspiracy wack. Fortunately the process of evolution--another scientific theory they try to refute with a magic book called the Bible--will see to their demise.

WTF are you talking about? The evidence is far from overwhelming....that's the problem. It's actually quite weak and unconvincing in many respects, but it has been subjected to the "bandwagon effect" by those involved in what has become far more of a political movement than a science....

....and why are you silly band-wagon devotees always calling those who question it, "conspiracy" nuts or "flat earth believers"

In fact, it's the so called climate "science" itself that's is far closer to a conspiracy.

Few people actually doubt that climate change occurs. We know it does...it's not exactly breaking news. It always has and continues to do so in short and long underlaying cycles. The magnetic poles reverse from time to time as well.....and we know that ocean levels have risen and fallen in the past....before we were even around to cause anything.

Where in the world do you connect the questioning of climate science causes and predictions to refuting evolution?

I totally believe in the Darwinian theory of evolution (on the understanding that it too has it's gaps and imperfections even with 156 years of study and reinforcement behind it) but when it comes to questioning the climate fanatics, (with just a few decades of study and a great deal of questionable and manipulated data behind them) suddenly that's makes me some kind of Bible thumper and against evolution too..????..... Jeeeesus what a lame argument.....

Originally Posted by koman

WTF are you talking about? The evidence is far from overwhelming....that's the problem. It's actually quite weak and unconvincing in many respects, but it has been subjected to the "bandwagon effect" by those involved in what has become far more of a political movement than a science....

The reality is the exact opposite of this...

Here you go. A free online course for all of you in denial to go and join and prove to the scientists that they are wrong and you are right...

https://www.edx.org/course/making-se...qx-denial101x#!

Originally Posted by koman

The evidence is far from overwhelming....that's the problem. It's actually quite weak and unconvincing in many respects, but it has been subjected to the "bandwagon effect" by those involved in what has become far more of a political movement than a science....

Can you provide some valid evidence to back this claim up? You tried once before and fell flat on your face. Literally all the links you provided were the some that boon mee constantly reposts and all were thoroughly debunked long ago.

Why is it that the scientists are comfortable with the fact that there is clear, conclusive evidence and you are not? Could it be simply that it makes you uncomfortable? Change has away of scaring people and you have proven before in many other threads that you are fearful of change.

Originally Posted by koman

In fact, it's the so called climate "science" itself that's is far closer to a conspiracy.

Can you elaborate on this? I can clearly see a conspiracy on the denialist side. It doesnt take a genius to follow the money trail. However trying to weave a "conspiracy" out of the science gets dicey at best.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Can you provide some valid evidence to back this claim up?

What evidence? Everything that does not support the bandwagon is attributed to either "Faux News", " Big oil", The "Koch Bros" , or some vague religious order, or belief...

There is really not much point is there? It's a bit like having a discussion with a troop of Jehovah's witnesses about the existence of Jehovah...... They will not be moved, because I can't "prove" that Jehovah does not exist......

On the other hand they will claim that they are surrounded by "proof" that he does exist... so it's game, set and match to the Witnesses...

^ A so you admit that there is no valid evidence to support climate denial. What is this "bandwagon" that you speak of. One of the tactics of the denialist (the real cult here) movement is to try and paint those who merely accept what 97% of climate scientists are saying as some sort of extremists when in fact the opposite is true.

You have to be either incredibly dense or stupid to not see the scientific evidence. It has been posted over and over and over again in this thread. All from well respected scientific organizations.

The fact is you just refuse to see it.

Originally Posted by bsnub

You have to be either incredibly dense or stupid to not see the scientific evidence. It has been posted over and over and over again in this thread. All from well respected scientific organizations.

I think you've gotten to the meat of it.

Originally Posted by bsnub

You have to be either incredibly dense or stupid to not see the scientific evidence. It has been posted over and over and over again in this thread. All from well respected scientific organizations.

The fact is you just refuse to see it.

Being a wanker is just an easier for some.

Originally Posted by S Landreth

We may even be witnessing the start of the long-awaited jump in global temperatures.

Good news. How much longer do we have to wait? Can they get it done by the start of winter?

Originally Posted by Plan B

Originally Posted by S Landreth

We may even be witnessing the start of the long-awaited jump in global temperatures.

Good news. How much longer do we have to wait? Can they get it done by the start of winter?

Jist ask Al Gore.

The God of all climate-istas

The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever
New data shows that the “vanishing” of polar ice is not the result of runaway global warming


When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records – on which the entire panic ultimately rested – were systematically “adjusted” to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.
Two weeks ago, under the headline “How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming”, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.
This was only the latest of many examples of a practice long recognised by expert observers around the world – one that raises an ever larger question mark over the entire official surface-temperature record.

Following my last article, Homewood checked a swathe of other South American weather stations around the original three. In each case he found the same suspicious one-way “adjustments”. First these were made by the US government’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN). They were then amplified by two of the main official surface records, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss) and the National Climate Data Center (NCDC), which use the warming trends to estimate temperatures across the vast regions of the Earth where no measurements are taken. Yet these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in “global warming”.

President Barack Obama will use the report as evidence for action as he tries to move ahead with policies on climate change before leaving office in 2017
Barack Obama's personal battle against climate change 23 Jan 2015
Rise in sea levels is 'faster than we thought' 14 Jan 2015
Homewood has now turned his attention to the weather stations across much of the Arctic, between Canada (51 degrees W) and the heart of Siberia (87 degrees E). Again, in nearly every case, the same one-way adjustments have been made, to show warming up to 1 degree C or more higher than was indicated by the data that was actually recorded. This has surprised no one more than Traust Jonsson, who was long in charge of climate research for the Iceland met office (and with whom Homewood has been in touch). Jonsson was amazed to see how the new version completely “disappears” Iceland’s “sea ice years” around 1970, when a period of extreme cooling almost devastated his country’s economy.
One of the first examples of these “adjustments” was exposed in 2007 by the statistician Steve McIntyre, when he discovered a paper published in 1987 by James Hansen, the scientist (later turned fanatical climate activist) who for many years ran Giss. Hansen’s original graph showed temperatures in the Arctic as having been much higher around 1940 than at any time since. But as Homewood reveals in his blog post, “Temperature adjustments transform Arctic history”, Giss has turned this upside down. Arctic temperatures from that time have been lowered so much that that they are now dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.

Homewood’s interest in the Arctic is partly because the “vanishing” of its polar ice (and the polar bears) has become such a poster-child for those trying to persuade us that we are threatened by runaway warming. But he chose that particular stretch of the Arctic because it is where ice is affected by warmer water brought in by cyclical shifts in a major Atlantic current – this last peaked at just the time 75 years ago when Arctic ice retreated even further than it has done recently. The ice-melt is not caused by rising global temperatures at all.
Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record – for reasons GHCN and Giss have never plausibly explained – has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/eart...ndal-ever.html

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

Two weeks ago, under the headline “How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming”, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.

Some guy with a blog, huh? Poor paranoid twaddle without a bit of science.
Oh well, one more idiot I don't have tot waste my time listening to.