31,000 Scientist Say No To Global Warming

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by blazinlow89

No remember global warming has stopped for the next 10 years. Even though the levels of "GHG" havent changed.

Larry, Gore has always reminded me of a cult leader.

A cult is nothing without a following. Gore has a following.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by blazinlow89

No remember global warming has stopped for the next 10 years. Even though the levels of "GHG" havent changed.

Larry, Gore has always reminded me of a cult leader.

...this thing;

YouTube - Al Gore Accepts Nobel Peace Prize - Part 1

[blazinlow89]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...this thing;

YouTube - Al Gore Accepts Nobel Peace Prize - Part 1

I think he would make a better preacher than an environmental activist. felt like i was sitting in church watching that. Larry, the whole time he is talking of the doom that will come, not a mention of how to solve the problem. He has a problem and a conclusion but no solution. I think whats funny is all his followers, and those who cant see past the global warming theory, dont see the fact of past events, dont understand how the sun can change the temperature here on earth.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...this thing;

YouTube - Al Gore Accepts Nobel Peace Prize - Part 1

I could only stand about 3 minutes of that.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by blazinlow89

I He has a problem and a conclusion but no solution. I think whats funny is all his followers, and those who cant see past the global warming theory, dont see the fact of past events, dont understand how the sun can change the temperature here on earth.

...if you listen he and, guess who, John McCain, have the 'simplest and most effective' solution; cap and trade. Know what that is? Everybody gets a carbon emission number based on what they emit now and there is your cap. Wanna expand? Buy someones elses numbers. Or, perhaps, a new chit or two from...Uncle Sam.

Know who wins? Giant global quasi governmental corporations. By by small business. By by middle guys.

This is the most socialist thing going on out their right now.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

I could only stand about 3 minutes of that.

...back and watch the rest. Plus part two. These people are freaking psychos. They sit atop us all, like Greek Gods, waving about for what the little people demand of them. Worlds tremble before them. The sun bows it's subservience to their great, caring minds.

You really oughta watch it, if only for the entertainment value. People wonder if there really are James Bond characters out there, the megalomaniac villains who seriously, truly want to rule the world; there are.

[Baja28]

All you non-believers better just listen up!!! Ok, so April & May have been cooler than usual, today was like, like, like 84!!! So HA!!

[This_person]

Originally Posted by wildsage

From the IPCC:
"Although natural internal climate processes, such as El Niño, can cause variations in global mean temperature for relatively short periods, analysis indicates that a large portion is due to external factors. Brief periods of global cooling have followed major volcanic eruptions, such as Mt. Pinatubo in 1991. In the early part of the 20th century, global average temperature rose, during which time greenhouse gas concentrations started to rise, solar output was probably increasing and there was little volcanic activity. During the 1950s and 1960s, average global temperatures levelled off, as increases in aerosols from fossil fuels and other sources cooled the planet. The eruption of Mt. Agung in 1963 also put large quantities of reflective dust into the upper atmosphere. The rapid warming observed since the 1970s has occurred in a period when the increase in greenhouse gases has dominated over all other factors.
Numerous experiments have been conducted using climate models to determine the likely causes of the 20th-century climate change. These experiments indicate that models cannot reproduce the rapid warming observed in recent decades when they only take into account variations in solar output and volcanic activity. However [...] models are able to simulate the observed 20th-century changes in temperature when they include all of the most important external factors, including human influences from sources such as greenhouse gases and natural external factors. The model-estimated responses to these external factors are detectable in the 20th-century climate globally and in each individual continent except Antarctica, where there are insufficient observations. The human influence on climate very likely dominates over all other causes of change in global average surface temperature during the past half century."

Interestingly, I note several subtle changes in wording. Climate change replaces warming when it's noted that temperatures leveled off, cooled, and warmed all due to man-made influences. Aerosols are seen to level temperatures off, yet are touted as causing warming. The rise in temperatures noted earliest in the 20th century are, by any reasonable estimation, long preceding the man-made global warming gas emissions. Temperature variations THEN are due entirely to natural effects (assumed as solar activity in the explaination above), but later in the 20th century, models can't say the same thing? And, the global rise in temperatures noted above starts in the 70's. 30 years of global warming makes a trend?

Nothing from the IPCC makes sense, when looked at with a skeptical, logical lens.

[wildsage]

Originally Posted by This_person

Interestingly, I note several subtle changes in wording. Climate change replaces warming when it's noted that temperatures leveled off, cooled, and warmed all due to man-made influences. Aerosols are seen to level temperatures off, yet are touted as causing warming. The rise in temperatures noted earliest in the 20th century are, by any reasonable estimation, long preceding the man-made global warming gas emissions. Temperature variations THEN are due entirely to natural effects (assumed as solar activity in the explaination above), but later in the 20th century, models can't say the same thing? And, the global rise in temperatures noted above starts in the 70's. 30 years of global warming makes a trend?
Nothing from the IPCC makes sense, when looked at with a skeptical, logical lens.

It has never been called the IPGW; it is the International Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC's conclusion is that man-made effects are now overcoming the natural climate-influencing factors.
It makes sense if you study it. There has always been variation in the planet's climate because it is a dynamic system. The many phenomena that influnce global temps have various interactions, not easy to understand in just a few sentences. One example: clouds reflect solar energy from space (albedo) creating a net cooling; they also reflect back heat from the earth's surface, which is why overcast nights are warmer than clear nights. This seemingly simple occurrence does not act alone; other things will affect the net gain or loss of heat -- GHG concentrations, aerosols, relative temp, etc.
For a good primer, see NOAA's Q&A (Global Warming Frequently Asked Questions) or see other links in earlier posts.

[wildsage]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...it is and psychotic freaks like Al Gore and his anti capitalism friends and supporters have succeed in making CO2, an essential ingredient in plant life, hence our own, into a bogeyman.

Al Gore an anti-capitalist? OFP!

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

It's as though they've convinced people that breast milk is a bad thing.

Nope, that's the companies that sell baby formula.

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

Imagine, a compound that is essential to life on this planet, not only in plant life which creates the very oxygen we breath[e], but in absorbing infrared light that would otherwise burn this planet to a crisp is actually seen in the popular mind as a bad thing.
Imagine a compound that holds far more promise in creating more food and ground cover AND more climate moderation than excess on this planet than it does in killing this planet and it is a bad thing.

Anything has the potential to be a pollutant if there is too much of it, even water, even oxygen.
Carbon dioxide is not usually the limiting factor in plant growth, except in the ones we consider "weeds" that thrive in poorer soils. "Carbon-Fertilization" experiments with elevated levels of CO2 revealed that nutrients (N & P) tend to be the limiting factors. Of the crops that did perform better (growthwise), their nutritional value was reduced. If higher CO2 concentrations do advance plant growth and sequester the carbon, there is still the question about how to lock that carbon up so it isn't just rereleased.

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

he is a frightening person and he has a frightening faith.

It is a frightening concept that humans can modify the planetary climate to the point where other species and our own livelihoods are threatened; it is more terrifying to think that so many are willing to turn a blind eye to the possibility that their descendants are just plain effed because we don't want to do anything about it.