Global Warming?

[Egon]

Lets see how many Tree huggers have the stones to read this.

Eye's work well for reading! :thumbsup:
Stones, they be something else and can really vary in composition and formation. They don't read well.

Google says this guy was a journalist. Couldn't find any papers of a scientific bent that were published in Journals.:thumbsup:

 

[/pine]

No, they prefer spoon fed facts.

Most (but not all) of the man made side of the dilemma only want facts that support their side...

Many just want to huff and puff (citing only what supports their beliefs) and try to make you think that their opinion is right and anyone with opposing views is wrong...

IMO, if the evidence was (omni) conclusive...there would much fewer skeptics...but is does not even come close to being conclusive and it won't ever be in most if not all of our lifetimes...

 

[toppop52]

The ingullibale gullible may never be aware of gullibeness!

Having read your recent posts, I'd have to agree.

 

[Egon]

Having read your recent posts, I'd have to agree.

Boy's oh Boy's, did you say you are one of the ingullibale?:thumbsup:

 

[toppop52]

Boy's oh Boy's, did you say you are one of the ingullibale?:thumbsup:

I suppose those of a certain mindset and reading level could construe it that way, so sure, why not? I mean why should I agitate the inmates before their morning meds?
By the way, I have a really good friend who is a Newfi and he almost seems normal, must be something in the water around The Scosh that makes you guys strange!

 

[Egon]

I suppose those of a certain mindset and reading level could construe it that way, so sure, why not? I mean why should I agitate the inmates before their morning meds?

You sure you up on your Reading?

The Rock, nope, I'm not from there.:thumbsup:

 

[Loren49]

Surely you cannot be so ignorant that you didn't recognize that as a poke at you for repeatedly using the phrase to cover up your inability to answer the simple questions I've asked of all you AGW proponents. Or, perhaps you are, I wouldn't know.
Isn't it hard to maintain your veil of narcissism when you can't answer such simple questions? I mean really, how can you continue to believe yourself so intelligent when you can't even find a cut and paste to accurately rebut those simple facts that you have been quizzed on repeatedly? In the past 10,000 years there have been much warmer events that actually warmed much faster and they could not possible have been related to fossil fuel use, why is this time absolutely in total opposition to the previous events? Just accurately and with proof answer how those other events happened and why this time has nothing to do with those reasons and you win! Of course you can't so you "Deny, deny, deny re-accuse!":laughing:

Your back tracking is amazing. You made a claim that was ficticious and false and then come back with dribble. Amazing!

Your "gotcha" questions are indeed simple and its likely that with some research you could find the scientists explanation. (If you were interested in the science)

In case you didn't read the article I referenced a few times now.

Distinguishing Climate "Deniers" From "Skeptics"
A LITTLE HUMILITY

Skeptics go on to admit that it is both rare and significant when nearly 100% of the scientists in any field share a consensus-model, before splitting up to fight over sub-models. Hence, if an outsider perceives "something wrong" with a core scientific model, the humble and justified response of that curious outsider is to ask "what mistake am I making?" before assuming 100% of the experts are wrong.

In contrast, Deniers glom onto an anecdotal "gotcha!" from a dogma-driven radio show or politically biased blog site. Whereupon they conclude that ALL of the atmospheric scientists must be in on some wretched conspiracy. Uniformly. At the same time.
-----
You are quite predictable.

Loren

 

[Rainbody]

In contrast, Deniers glom onto an anecdotal "gotcha!" from a dogma-driven radio show or politically biased blog site. Whereupon they conclude that ALL of the atmospheric scientists must be in on some wretched conspiracy. Uniformly. At the same time.
-----
You are quite predictable.

Loren[/QUOTE]

Someone knows the pink book very well.
Accuse the other side of exactly what you are doing. Therefore any counter appears as sour grapes.
Because in the end, you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

 

[Egon]

Because in the end, you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

Whatever one is when the call comes wind direction and velocity awareness might keep things presentable!:thumbsup:

 

[tcreeley]

Updated: Mar 12, 2012 8:07 PM EDT

KUSI.com - KUSI News - San Diego CA - News, Weather, PPR - The Amazing Story Behind the Global Warming Scam
By John Coleman
January 28, 2009 (Revised and edited February 11, 2009)

The key players are now all in place in Washington and in state governments across America to officially label carbon dioxide as a pollutant and enact laws that tax us citizens for our carbon footprints. Only two details stand in the way: the faltering economic times and a dramatic turn toward a colder climate. The last two bitter winters have led to a rise in public awareness that there is no runaway global warming.

I started reading- took the challenge!- and stopped after reading the underlined. I realize he is referring to a few years ago- but in Maine- every winter is the same or warmer than the previous one. No global cooling there. This is just more wishful foolishness.

 

[newbury]

The last two bitter winters have led to a rise in public awareness that there is no runaway global warming.

Last winter was EXTREMELY bitter in NE Mississippi and Northern Virginia - Very hard to bear - virtually no cold temperatures, the grass grew all the time and I had to mow twice as often, the insects hardly died off. It was a terrible winter.

 

[toppop52]

You sure you up on your Reading?

The Rock, nope, I'm not from there.:thumbsup:

The "Scosh", is a reference to Nova Scotia, not the the "Rock".

 

[toppop52]

Your back tracking is amazing. You made a claim that was ficticious and false and then come back with dribble. Amazing!

Your "gotcha" questions are indeed simple and its likely that with some research you could find the scientists explanation. (If you were interested in the science)

In case you didn't read the article I referenced a few times now.

Distinguishing Climate "Deniers" From "Skeptics"
A LITTLE HUMILITY

Skeptics go on to admit that it is both rare and significant when nearly 100% of the scientists in any field share a consensus-model, before splitting up to fight over sub-models. Hence, if an outsider perceives "something wrong" with a core scientific model, the humble and justified response of that curious outsider is to ask "what mistake am I making?" before assuming 100% of the experts are wrong.

In contrast, Deniers glom onto an anecdotal "gotcha!" from a dogma-driven radio show or politically biased blog site. Whereupon they conclude that ALL of the atmospheric scientists must be in on some wretched conspiracy. Uniformly. At the same time.
-----
You are quite predictable.

Loren

I read the whole painfully condescending thing and it had no relevance to my questions, which are indeed accurate and germane.

 

[toppop52]

In contrast, Deniers glom onto an anecdotal "gotcha!" from a dogma-driven radio show or politically biased blog site. Whereupon they conclude that ALL of the atmospheric scientists must be in on some wretched conspiracy. Uniformly. At the same time.
-----
You are quite predictable.

Loren

Someone knows the pink book very well.
Accuse the other side of exactly what you are doing. Therefore any counter appears as sour grapes.
Because in the end, you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.[/QUOTE]

Quoting Dillon now?

 

[Redneck in training]

Last winter was EXTREMELY bitter in NE Mississippi and Northern Virginia - Very hard to bear - virtually no cold temperatures, the grass grew all the time and I had to mow twice as often, the insects hardly died off. It was a terrible winter.

Same in Iowa. My pond had hardly any ice on last winter. We had several very mild winters in row.

 

[toppop52]

Last winter was EXTREMELY bitter in NE Mississippi and Northern Virginia - Very hard to bear - virtually no cold temperatures, the grass grew all the time and I had to mow twice as often, the insects hardly died off. It was a terrible winter.

And two years before we had a bitterly cold winter and record snowfall here. From December '09 through the following winter brought 3 snowstorms of over 20" and 3 more over 10". Below normal temps from November through April.

 

[Egon]

The "Scosh", is a reference to Nova Scotia, not the the "Rock".

Can't seem to figure out what "The Scosh" references to?:

Uh, I'm not really from Nova Scotia either!:thumbsup:

 

[Loren49]

Climate change is here — and worse than we thought - The Washington Post

"James E. Hansen directs the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

When I testified before the Senate in the hot summer of 1988 , I warned of the kind of future that climate change would bring to us and our planet. I painted a grim picture of the consequences of steadily increasing temperatures, driven by mankind’s use of fossil fuels.

But I have a confession to make: I was too optimistic.........

In a new analysis of the past six decades of global temperatures, which will be published Monday, my colleagues and I have revealed a stunning increase in the frequency of extremely hot summers, with deeply troubling ramifications for not only our future but also for our present.

This is not a climate model or a prediction but actual observations of weather events and temperatures that have happened. Our analysis shows that it is no longer enough to say that global warming will increase the likelihood of extreme weather and to repeat the caveat that no individual weather event can be directly linked to climate change. To the contrary, our analysis shows that, for the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change.

----------------------

I know....another one of these research scientists and their data:confused2:

Loren

 

[toppop52]

Can't seem to figure out what "The Scosh" references to?:

Uh, I'm not really from Nova Scotia either!:thumbsup:

So? How would that impact a thing I said?

 

[toppop52]

Climate change is here — and worse than we thought - The Washington Post

"James E. Hansen directs the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

When I testified before the Senate in the hot summer of 1988 , I warned of the kind of future that climate change would bring to us and our planet. I painted a grim picture of the consequences of steadily increasing temperatures, driven by mankind’s use of fossil fuels.

But I have a confession to make: I was too optimistic.........

In a new analysis of the past six decades of global temperatures, which will be published Monday, my colleagues and I have revealed a stunning increase in the frequency of extremely hot summers, with deeply troubling ramifications for not only our future but also for our present.

This is not a climate model or a prediction but actual observations of weather events and temperatures that have happened. Our analysis shows that it is no longer enough to say that global warming will increase the likelihood of extreme weather and to repeat the caveat that no individual weather event can be directly linked to climate change. To the contrary, our analysis shows that, for the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change.

----------------------

I know....another one of these research scientists and their data:confused2:

Loren

If they are accurate and I can't say one way or another without looking at reams of documents from multiple sources, but for the sake of argument let's say it is warming. I for one, never said it isn't warming this instant, but it certainly has before, more drastically and at higher rates, in eras where man could not be blamed. When they adequately answer the questions asked before, then they will believable, not before. The earth has continuously gone through warming/cooling cycles, so far nobody can explain why the earlier events were nature but the current events are not. Quoting more people's beliefs doesn't make it so.