Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 233
Like Tree16Likes

Thread: The Great Global Warming Swindle

  1. #26
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    Did Al Gore show up at your house and force you to wear a sweater and turn down your thermostat? Engaging you in a discussion is a bit like trying to talk to a 3 year old that is tugging on my pant leg when they have to go pee pee. Good luck with your crusade to drive whatever kind of vehicle you want and to keep your house as warm or cool as you like. Someday my friend I hope you win those freedoms back for us.

    Al Gore did far worse, he invented a lie to seduce our Scientifically illiterate government and millions of scientifically illiterate gullible Americans into convicting themselves of a crime that is actually a none crime.

    Al Gore testified before the House Committee that Cap-N-Trade policies are recommended cure for greenhouse gas build up. He even went on to recommend carbon credits and a carbon tax on fissile fuel company's. Al Gore founded all the Carbon Credit company's and stands to make $7 Trillion per year if all the world's country's purchase his carbon credits. A clear cut case of Criminal Grand Larceny!

    Thanks to the lies spewed by Al Gore's man made global warming propaganda machine there are now over 300 coal burning power generators that have filed for bankruptcy and gone out of business. Causing energy prices to skyrocket out of control and driving more people out of their jobs and living in the streets. Along with rolling brown outs and blackouts spreading across America like a plague. The average coal fired power plant has to spend at least $500 million to do CO2 sequestering before they can continue their operations. Which makes it impossible for any coal fired power plant to stay in business. This has not only destroyed the coal industry, but has destroyed peoples jobs, retirement pensions, 401K Plans, IRA's, etc., ....

    There are now 90 Million Americans unemployed (67%) and living on Welfare and food stamps thanks to the policies recommended by Al Gore, there are only 39 million Americans left with jobs to pay the bills and the taxes. Al Gore's man made global warming lie has turned America and the world into a 3rd world banana Republic (Except with out Republic part).

    Human Poverty is the worse form of human pollution; just at places like Bangladesh, Etheopea, India, etc., you can see with your own eyes how poverty destroys the environment. Yet, today's environmental-nazi's number one recommendation is poverty. This generation of environmentalists are actually anti-environmentalists!!!


  2. #27
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    Oh, look everyone, the cut and past function works on my computer too.

    A spokesman for the Royal Society, Britain’s national academy of science, said: “The world’s leading climate experts at the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that it is greater than 90 per cent likely that human activity is responsible for most of the observed warming in recent decades. That is a pretty strong consensus.

    “The science has come a long way since 1998 and it continues to point in one direction - the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to avert dangerous climate change.”

    When Al Gore knocks on your door, please do as instructed. Al Gore showed up today and took my Escalade and now I have to drive a smart car. And instead of heat I have to wear and itchy wool sweater and type with pencils because it is so cold in my house that I have to wear mittens.


    Spoken like a true Environmental fascists.

    Out of the 2600 so called scientists at the IPCC, only 53 of the Administrative head believes that humans are responsible for man made global warming, and none of them are scientists. Out of the 2600 that are scientists, none of them believe humans are the root cause of man made global warming. (Watch the original Video of this thread to get the details)

    Most of the warming during the 20th Century occurred between 1922 and 1940, long before there were any interstate highways criss crossing any country. And when the Post World War II economic book took off after 1946 and human CO2 production skyrocketed; the Earth's climate changed and temperatures fell, not for one or two years, but for 4 decades. In the 1970's, the same retards that preach global warming today, were preaching global cooling then because of the 4 decades long decline in global temperatures. And telling us that global cooling was going to cause sea level rises, more violent weather, flooding, drought, famine, pestilence, etc., ... and some 30 years later they tell us that global warming is going to do the same thing. Man Made Global warming doesn't even pass the laugh test!!!


  3. #28
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Even if the Earth's average temperature increases by 10 degrees the temperature in Antartica will still be colder than -100 degrees F and would only increase the Antartic Ice sheet, not decrease it. Today's observations who an increasing Antarctic Ice sheets, not a shrinking one.

    Climate models still cannot simulate precipitation.




  4. #29
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Man Made Global Warming has more to do with Global Governance than anything to do with real science:



    Compare the real observed facts to the arguments made by Man Made Global Warming Propaganda and you can easily see why environmental NAZI lawsuits have not won a single court case to date based on man made global warming arguements.

  5. #30
    ribshaw's Avatar
    ribshaw is offline Nigerian Ministry
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    4,825

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Nourjan View Post
    Didn't they thoroughly debunked your argument t at the scam.com thread you started ?
    Reference above link. My cut and paste skills are as strong if not stronger than yours grasshopper.

    I can not even come to a conclusion whether I should take a multivitamin because my body needs it, or not because I am just fertilizing the toilet water. Should I drink coffee because it reduces plaque on my brain, or not drink it because it raises my blood pressure? But you seem to have this whole thing figured out because of a few Utube clips that run contrary to what the majority of Climate Scientists currently agree on. OK go with that, bring it up on dates, I bet the ladies really love climate talk!!!

    Edward, rather than waste anymore time with you, I just quoted the above thread where all of your distortions were thoroughly challenged. The ironic thing is you seem to be drawing conclusions the people you are quoting don't come to, including folks who work for the Koch's and Big Oil!

    More to the point are so obsessed with this subject that it is making you mental, so much so that you can't even have a discussion with a casual observer. If you read my posts you would notice I took a rather practical stance from an economic, personal, and business standpoint. The US uses roughly 25% of the world's energy and represents 5% of the world's population. Most is used out of necessity and some out of sheer wastefulness. I see no reason that we would not with a cost benefit analysis keep moving toward the cleanest most efficient forms of energy. For instance, I would rather not see some family in Kentucky or West Virgina grow up with breathing problems or develop Black Lung just because I like to wear shorts in my house 24/7 365. I would rather not see rivers of oil running down the streets of Arkansas just because I enjoy driving an SUV. You seem to not be challenged to think about anything beyond your preconceived conspiracy dujour.

    The only conclusion you have reinforced for me is a select group of people are making themselves millions of dollars a year ginning up these thoughts. But you carry on, its your life to live as you see fit.

  6. #31
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    Oh, look everyone, the cut and past function works on my computer too.

    A spokesman for the Royal Society, Britain’s national academy of science, said: “The world’s leading climate experts at the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that it is greater than 90 per cent likely that human activity is responsible for most of the observed warming in recent decades. That is a pretty strong consensus.

    “The science has come a long way since 1998 and it continues to point in one direction - the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to avert dangerous climate change.”

    When Al Gore knocks on your door, please do as instructed. Al Gore showed up today and took my Escalade and now I have to drive a smart car. And instead of heat I have to wear and itchy wool sweater and type with pencils because it is so cold in my house that I have to wear mittens.
    I haven't cut and paste anything, all I've done is produce the actual measured data and the facts themselves as they have been measured by the IPCC, NASA and many other scientists around the world.

    Out of the so called 2600 Scientists a the IPCC, none of them agree with any of the scientific illiterate claims made by Global Warming Alarmists. Only the 53 Administrative heads of the IPCC believe in and preach "Man Made Global Warming". And none of those 53 are scientists, they are all instead political Marxist card carrying hacks.

  7. #32
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Rivers of Oil never flow on purpose, accidents in the oil company's are very rare now and are not a requirement of drilling for oil, refining oil or using any of the products that it makes. Unlike what we were doing before the discovery of all the cool things we can make from crude oil, it doesn't require us to kill a single plant, animal or human to drill, refine or use the byproducts of crude oil.

    Environmental NAZI's never discuss the ramifications of not using crude oil, and here are those ramifications of not using crude oil:

    1) We would have to resort to killing many millions of Whales, Whalreses, Seals, elephants, rinos and trees for our raw materials. And that does require us to kill many animals.

    2) Global economic collapse and poverty. Human Poverty is the worse form of environmental pollution and destruction. Just look at Bangladeshi, Etheopea, Samalia, etc., ... one can see with their own eyes that human poverty is the most environmental form pollution caused by humans, not prosperity.

    3) Returning back to the stone age where the average life expectancy of humans was 12 years of age.

    4) Lost jobs.

    5) Lost retirement pensions.

    6) No transportation means mass starvation. Before the invention of the gasoline fueled automobile; humans could only on average travel 25 miles per day. Which means without high speed transportation there is no more 911 rescue, no more firefighting, no more paramedics, no more hospitals (because no one could get to one quick enough), millions more dying every year from heart attacks and strokes because of no transportation.

    7) Global Starvation for most of the world's 7 billion humans, because without crude oil there is no more pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, transportation, cultivating, planting and harvesting.

    8) 7 Billion humans would starve to death without fossil fuels.

    ..

  8. #33
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Beacon View Post
    Could you supply a link to your data and show how it supports you contention?
    Both long-term and short-term variations in solar activity are hypothesized to affect global climate, but it has proven extremely challenging to directly quantify the link between solar variation and the earth's climate.
    The Sun and the Earth's Climate
    "The absolute radiometers carried by satellites since the late 1970s have produced indisputable evidence that total solar irradiance varies systematically over the 11-year sunspot cycle,"

    I would say it is fairly much accepted that the Sun goes through and eleven year cycle of activity to dormancy. But if your theory is correct then the Earth should heat up and then cool down over eleven years. So why is it that the Earth is gradually heating up and NOT cooling down by the same rate? Why is it that particularly since the advent of peak oil and mass exploitation of fossil fuels that this warming trend is taking place? Is it just a co incidence?
    We have measured Temperatures since 1850
    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
    Shows average temperature going UP not up and down but a continual UPWARD trend.

    Satellites do not measure temperature. They measure radiances in various wavelength bands, which must then be mathematically inverted to obtain indirect inferences of temperature.
    Since 1979, microwave sounding units (MSUs) on NOAA polar orbiting satellites have measured the intensity of upwelling microwave radiation from atmospheric oxygen.
    Since 1979 the Stratospheric sounding units (SSUs) on the NOAA operational satellites provided near global stratospheric temperature data above the lower stratosphere.

    Lower stratospheric cooling is mainly caused by the effects of ozone depletion with a possible contribution from increased stratospheric water vapor and greenhouse gases increase.
    http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2003/2003_Shine_etal.pdf

    There is a decline in stratospheric temperatures, interspersed by warmings related to volcanic eruptions. Global Warming theory suggests that the stratosphere should cool while the troposphere warms
    Line-by-line calculation of atmospheric fluxes and cooling rates: 2. Application to carbon dioxide, ozone, methane, nitrous oxide and the halocarbons - Clough - 2012 - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012) - Wiley Online Libr

    The long term cooling in the lower stratosphere occurred in two downward steps in temperature both after the transient warming related to explosive volcanic eruptions of El Chichón and Mount Pinatubo, this behavior of the global stratospheric temperature has been attributed to global ozone concentration variation in the two years following volcanic eruptions.
    here


    Since 1996 the trend is slightly positive due to ozone recover juxtaposed to a cooling trend of 0.1K/decade that is consistent with the predicted impact of increased greenhouse gases
    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v.../ngeo1282.html

    The above would take you five minutes to find on wikipedia
    As would this: Temperature record of the past 1000 years - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It is my suspicion that you are posting this because of a particular neoconservative American political/economic position and not because of science.
    Care to prove me wrong?
    This CO2 / Solar cycle plot comes from NASA and the IPCC. This Video Documentary the "Great Global Warming Swindle" discusses these two plots.

    Global Warming Artic Temperatures and Solar 3.JPG




    The sun has more than just the well known 11 year sunspot cycle, There is also a 22 year Magnetic flip cycle and about another half dozen other cycles that effect the peaks of the 11 year sunspot cycle peaks.

    ...

  9. #34
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    The longest recorded aspect of solar variations are changes in sunspots. The first record of sunspots dates to around 800 BC in China and the oldest surviving drawing of a sunspot dates to 1128. In 1610, astronomers began using the telescope to make observations of sunspots and their motions. Initial study was focused on their nature and behavior.[12] Although the physical aspects of sunspots were not identified until the 20th century, observations continued. Study was hampered during the 17th century due to the low number of sunspots during what is now recognized as an extended period of low solar activity, known as the Maunder Minimum. By the 19th century, there was a long enough record of sunspot numbers to infer periodic cycles in sunspot activity. In 1845, Princeton University professors Joseph Henry and Stephen Alexander observed the Sun with a thermopile and determined that sunspots emitted less radiation than surrounding areas of the Sun. The emission of higher than average amounts of radiation later were observed from the solar faculae.[13]

    Around 1900, researchers began to explore connections between solar variations and weather on Earth. Of particular note is the work of Charles Greeley Abbot. Abbot was assigned by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) to detect changes in the radiation of the Sun. His team had to begin by inventing instruments to measure solar radiation. Later, when Abbot was head of the SAO, it established a solar station at Calama, Chile to complement its data from Mount Wilson Observatory. He detected 27 harmonic periods within the 273-month Hale cycles, including 7, 13, and 39-month patterns. He looked for connections to weather by means such as matching opposing solar trends during a month to opposing temperature and precipitation trends in cities. With the advent of dendrochronology, scientists such as Waldo S. Glock attempted to connect variation in tree growth to periodic solar variations in the extant record and infer long-term secular variability in the solar constant from similar variations in millennial-scale chronologies.[14]

    Statistical studies that correlate weather and climate with solar activity have been popular for centuries, dating back at least to 1801, when William Herschel noted an apparent connection between wheat prices and sunspot records.[15] They now often involve high-density global datasets compiled from surface networks and weather satellite observations and/or the forcing of climate models with synthetic or observed solar variability to investigate the detailed processes by which the effects of solar variations propagate through the Earth's climate system.[16]

    800px-Sunspot_Numbers - JPG.jpg

  10. #35
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    The Temperature records going back 1000 years using Ice Core data from Greenland and the Antartic show a 500 year long Mideval Warm Period and a 700 year long Little Ice Age that we are still in.

    There was clearly a 500 year long Medieval Warm Period that was 1.5 degrees warmer than today and lasted between 800 A.D. to 1300 A.D.; In addition to that there was clearly a 700 year long Little Ice age that we are still in and have not yet completely come out of.


    Global Warming in the Past 1000 years.jpg

    This graph was produced by the IPCC.

  11. #36
    Spector567 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    52

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    The Temperature records going back 1000 years using Ice Core data from Greenland and the Antartic show a 500 year long Mideval Warm Period and a 700 year long Little Ice Age that we are still in.

    There was clearly a 500 year long Medieval Warm Period that was 1.5 degrees warmer than today and lasted between 800 A.D. to 1300 A.D.; In addition to that there was clearly a 700 year long Little Ice age that we are still in and have not yet completely come out of.


    Global Warming in the Past 1000 years.jpg

    This graph was produced by the IPCC.
    ED.... This has already been debunked 20+ times on the scams.com forum. As someone has already pointed out. It is very dishonest to move from forum to forum making the same long debunked claim.

    I'd also like to point out that this new group of people and they also question your motives, and your competence.

  12. #37
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    ED.... This has already been debunked 20+ times on the scams.com forum. As someone has already pointed out. It is very dishonest to move from forum to forum making the same long debunked claim.

    I'd also like to point out that this new group of people and they also question your motives, and your competence.
    You have debunked absolutely nothing!!!, This Temperature plot has been reproduced by literally hundreds of Climate research centers around the world, except on the sick twisted Marxist Michael Mann at Penn State University's hockey stick graph, that was clearly proven to be a complete fraud and the laughing stock of the scientific community since 2001, disagrees with this graph.

    100% of all other Climate Research centers have confirmed the existence of the 500 year long Medieval Warming period and the 700 year long Little Ice Age. And is widely excepted by all Climatologists. Only Michael Mann's Hockey stick graph has been 100% rejected by all Climatologists.


  13. #38
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    How Climate Alarmism Advances International Political Agendas

    The term “climate” is typically associated with annual world-wide average temperature records measured over at least three decades. Yet global warming observed less than two decades after many scientists had predicted a global cooling crisis prompted the United Nations to organize an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and to convene a continuing series of international conferences purportedly aimed at preventing an impending catastrophe. Virtually from the beginning, they had already attributed the “crisis” to human fossil-fuel carbon emissions.

    Opening remarks offered by Maurice Strong, who organized the first U.N. Earth Climate Summit (1992) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, revealed the real goal: “We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrialized civilization to collapse. Isn’t it our responsibility to bring this about?”

    Former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth (D-CO), then representing the Clinton-Gore administration as U.S Undersecretary of State for global issues, addressing the same Rio Climate Summit audience, agreed: “We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” (Wirth now heads the UN Foundation which lobbies for hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to help underdeveloped countries fight climate change.)

    Also speaking at the Rio conference, Deputy Assistant of State Richard Benedick, who then headed the policy divisions of the U.S. State Department said: “A global warming treaty [Kyoto] must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect.”

    In 1988, former Canadian Minister of the Environment Christine Stewart told editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald: “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

    In 1996, former Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev emphasized the importance of using climate alarmism to advance socialist Marxist objectives: “The threat of environmental crisis will be the international disaster key to unlock the New World Order.”

    Speaking at the 2000 UN Conference on Climate Change in the Hague, former President Jacques Chirac of France explained why the IPCC’s climate initiative supported a key Western European Kyoto Protocol objective: “For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance, one that should find a place within the World Environmental Organization which France and the European Union would like to see established.”

  14. #39
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle


    Some Interesting ClimateGate E-Mail Comments


    A note from Jones to Trenberth: “Kevin, Seems that this potential Nature [journal] paper may be worth citing, if it does say that GW [global warming] is having an effect on TC [tropical cyclone] activity.”

    Jones wanted to make sure that people who supported this connection be represented in IPCC reviews: “Getting people we know and trust [into IPCC] is vital – hence my comment about the tornadoes group.”

    Raymond Bradley, co-author of Michael Mann’s infamously flawed hockey stick paper which was featured in influential IPCC reports, took issue with another article jointly published by Mann and Phil Jones, stating: “I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL [Geophysical Research Letters] paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year reconstruction.”

    Trenberth associate Tom Wigley of the National Center for Atmospheric Research wrote: “Mike, the Figure you sent is very deceptive … there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC …”

    Wigley and Trenberth suggested in another e-mail to Mann: “If you think that [Yale professor James] Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official [American Geophysical Union] channels to get him ousted [as editor-in-chief of the Geophysical Research Letters journal].”

    A July 2004 communication from Phil Jones to Michael Mann referred to two papers recently published in Climate Research with a “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL” subject line observed: “I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth] and I will keep them out somehow—even if we have to redefine what the peer review literature is.”

    A June 4, 2003 e-mail from Keith Briffa to fellow tree ring researcher Edward Cook at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in New York stated: “I got a paper to review (submitted to the Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Sciences), written by a Korean guy and someone from Berkeley, that claims that the method of reconstruction that we use in dendroclimatology (reverse regression) is wrong, biased, lousy, horrible, etc…If published as is, this paper could really do some damage…It won’t be easy to dismiss out of hand as the math appears to be correct theoretically… I am really sorry but I have to nag about that review—Confidentially, I now need a hard and if required extensive case for rejecting.”

    Tom Crowley, a key member of Michael Mann’s global warming hockey team, wrote: “I am not convinced that the ‘truth’ is always worth reaching if it is at the cost of damaged personal relationships.”

    Several e-mail exchanges reveal that certain researchers believed well-intentioned ideology trumped objective science. Jonathan Overpeck, a coordinating lead IPCC report author, suggested: “The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out.”

    Phil Jones wrote: “Basic problem is that all models are wrong – not got enough middle and low level clouds. …what he [Zwiers] has done comes to a different conclusion than Caspar and Gene! I reckon this can be saved by careful wording.”

    Writing to Jones, Peter Thorne of the U.K. Met Office advised caution, saying: “Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary…”

    In another e-mail, Thorne stated: “I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.”

    Another scientist worries: “…clearly, some tuning or very good luck [is] involved. I doubt the modeling world will be able to get away with this much longer.”

    Still another observed: “It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion-and trillion-dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected regional climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability.”

    One researcher foresaw some very troubling consequences: “What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multi-decadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably…”

  15. #40
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    The Costs of Ideology Masquerading as Science

    As Greenpeace co-founder Peter Moore observed onFox Business News in January 2011: “We do not have any scientific proof that we are the cause of the global warming that has occurred in the last 200 years…The alarmism is driving us through scare tactics to adopt energy policies that are going to create a huge amount of energy poverty among the poor people. It’s not good for people and it’s not good for the environment…In a warmer world we can produce more food.”

    When Moore was asked who is responsible for promoting unwarranted climate fear and what their motives are, he said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.”

    Paul Ehrlich, best known for his 1968 doom and gloom book, The Population Bomb, reported in a March 2010 Nature editorial that a barrage of challenges countering the notion of a looming global warming catastrophe has his alarmist colleagues in big sweats: “Everyone is scared s***less [fecally void], but they don’t know what to do.”

    Yes, and it should, because consequences of subordinating climate science to ideology, however well-intentioned, have proven to be incredibly costly.

    The U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) reports that federal climate spending has increased from $4.6 billion in 2003 to $8.8 billion in 2010 (a total $106.7 billion over that period). This doesn’t include $79 billion more spent for climate change technology research, tax breaks for “green energy”, foreign aid to help other countries address “climate problems”; another $16.1 billion since 1993 in federal revenue losses due to green energy subsidies; or still another $26 billion earmarked for climate change programs and related activities in the 2009 “Stimulus Bill.”

    Virtually all of this is based upon unfounded representations that we are experiencing a known human-caused climate crisis, a claim based upon speculative theories, contrived data and totally unproven modeling predictions. And what redemptive solutions are urgently implored? We must give lots of money to the U.N. to redistribute; abandon fossil fuel use in favor of heavily subsidized but assuredly abundant, “free”, and “renewable” alternatives; and expand federal government growth, regulatory powers, and crony capitalist-enriched political campaign coffers.

    It is way past time to realize that none of this is really about protecting the planet from man-made climate change. It never was.
    Categories

  16. #41
    ribshaw's Avatar
    ribshaw is offline Nigerian Ministry
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    4,825

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    Al Gore founded all the Carbon Credit company's and stands to make $7 Trillion per year if all the world's country's purchase his carbon credits.
    Edmund I think you are making stuff up for attention. I would even go so far as to peg you as a granola eating liberal sitting in a pair of hemp shorts watching MSNBC 24/7 barely able to type because you are laughing so hard. For reference $7 Trillion dollars is the GDP of China and about 1/2 the GDP of the USA. So your above statement is so outlandish it has to be a joke.

    Then there is this from that other scam thread that has been referenced so many times. http://scam.com/showthread.php?t=189077&page=6

    Capture.JPG

    The Art Institute of Dallas is a private school, leads me to believe both you and your daughter laughed about this tale of Al Gore's overreaching control of Netflix. Nevertheless it was quickly proven to be, er shall we say not so accurate.

    Capture1.JPG

    And finally since my second pot of coffee is done and I have some scam research to do, I will do this:

    "Edmund's Cut and paste, Paste and Cut. Shift Print Screen, Ctrl V, Ctrl V, Ctrl V!!!!"

    My cut and paste skillz once again on proud display. Has to be true, I read it somewhere.

    No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these three main points; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which in 2007 updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position.[10][11] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions.
    Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    I have never watched "An Inconvenient Truth", but I think I will this weekend. Then maybe we can spam the internet with cut and paste pretending to be outraged together.
    "It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403

  17. #42
    Spector567 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    52

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    You have debunked absolutely nothing!!!, This Temperature plot has been reproduced by literally hundreds of Climate research centers around the world, except on the sick twisted Marxist Michael Mann at Penn State University's hockey stick graph, that was clearly proven to be a complete fraud and the laughing stock of the scientific community since 2001, disagrees with this graph.

    100% of all other Climate Research centers have confirmed the existence of the 500 year long Medieval Warming period and the 700 year long Little Ice Age. And is widely excepted by all Climatologists. Only Michael Mann's Hockey stick graph has been 100% rejected by all Climatologists.

    Ed.. No one is disputing the little ice age or the MEP. You just continue to ignore the fact that these changes took 700 years to happen vs. the 40 that it has taken the current warming. This has already been explained to you several times and you had NO RESPONSE except to rant.

    Also Mcmanns graph has been updated 100 times by other climate research facilities and they all look the same.
    Even the B.E.S.T study funded by the koch brothers backs up the current warming.

    Obviously 100% of climate facilities disagree with your conclusions since they still say climate change is occuring. Also I seriously have to ask. Why do you continue to post blurry screen shots of a movie and avoid posting the actual source material? Is it because the source material doesn't agree with the movies altered graphs? Or just that the graph doesn't say what you want it to say.

    P.S. How many forums do you spam on a daily basis? I know you are currently spamming 2.

    For those that are interested. Ed called me a scietific illiterate and listed 6 arguments. I dismentalled all 6. Ed rebutted 2 of 6 and than rebutted 0 of 6.
    http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=189077
    Starts on post 6.

    Do I really need to inform these people on your views on espestos?

  18. #43
    Spector567 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    52

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    You have debunked absolutely nothing!!!, This Temperature plot has been reproduced by literally hundreds of Climate research centers around the world, except on the sick twisted Marxist Michael Mann at Penn State University's hockey stick graph, that was clearly proven to be a complete fraud and the laughing stock of the scientific community since 2001, disagrees with this graph.

    100% of all other Climate Research centers have confirmed the existence of the 500 year long Medieval Warming period and the 700 year long Little Ice Age. And is widely excepted by all Climatologists. Only Michael Mann's Hockey stick graph has been 100% rejected by all Climatologists.

    ED.....What do you call Posts 6-14 (6 points, you rebutted 2 of 6, than 0 of 6)
    http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=189077

    For instance why do you keep using screen shots from the Swindle movie instead of the actual source graphs. Is that because the graphs from the movie have been doctored?
    Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global warming?

    Also as we previously discussed the fact that earth warms and cools is not the problem. It's the fact that it's happening 10-100 times faster than any natural event.

    Then there is also the B.E.S.T. Study funded by the conservative Koch brothers.
    Berkeley Earth
    Gee that graph looks similar. As do the hundreds of other data sets from across the globe.

    Also Kelderek and I would like to know if you have the source for that 17,500PHD Petition yet. I've been waiting since October for that. However, I suspect that's because it's the same as the 31,000 study from the Oregon Institute study. Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine - SourceWatch

  19. #44
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    I have not made anything up, I've have backed up all of my arguments with the naked facts, but when I back them up with the documented facts you accuse me of cut and paste. You are clearly one pethedic lying propagandist for sure!! You have yet to post a single fact, piece of measured data or observation to refute anything I've posted on this blog. Where is your proof?

    Proof is not quoting arguments from authority, proof is in the measured data and observations, not dumbed down cooked up computer models which have never worked, because none of them are capable of simulating water vapor or precipitation. All the computer models do is simulate CO2 and CO2 only while ignoring solar cycles, ocean currents and water vapor.


    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    Edmund I think you are making stuff up for attention. I would even go so far as to peg you as a granola eating liberal sitting in a pair of hemp shorts watching MSNBC 24/7 barely able to type because you are laughing so hard. For reference $7 Trillion dollars is the GDP of China and about 1/2 the GDP of the USA. So your above statement is so outlandish it has to be a joke.

    Then there is this from that other scam thread that has been referenced so many times. http://scam.com/showthread.php?t=189077&page=6

    Capture.JPG

    The Art Institute of Dallas is a private school, leads me to believe both you and your daughter laughed about this tale of Al Gore's overreaching control of Netflix. Nevertheless it was quickly proven to be, er shall we say not so accurate.
    Because the Art Institute of Dallas takes Government Grants, Tuitions, Loans, etc., ... The Art Institute of Dallas must also abide by Government Regulations and force their students to watch, be examined on and agree with the Propaganda film "The Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore. The same Al Gore that was a "D" Student in Earth Science, a "C--" in Math and made an "F" in everything else. Based on Al Gore's academic record he isn't even qualified to operate flush toilets without parental supervision.

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post

    Capture1.JPG

    And finally since my second pot of coffee is done and I have some scam research to do, I will do this:

    "Edmund's Cut and paste, Paste and Cut. Shift Print Screen, Ctrl V, Ctrl V, Ctrl V!!!!"

    My cut and paste skillz once again on proud display. Has to be true, I read it somewhere.

    No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these three main points; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which in 2007 updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position.[10][11] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions.
    Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    I have never watched "An Inconvenient Truth", but I think I will this weekend. Then maybe we can spam the internet with cut and paste pretending to be outraged together.


    In Al Gore's "Inconvenience Truth" he spends most of his time riding around in shofer driven limousine and flying around in his Leer Jet lecturing the rest of us on how we need to learn to live on less; while we watch him live on more. He is the Quint essetial definition of a Fascist driven Leftist style Marxist control freak, just like other Global Warming Alarmists are. They aren't interested in the environment, they are only interested in the control over others.

    If you really want to get the real facts watch the real Documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle" There are more facts, more IPCC Scientists, environmental Scientists, NASA Scientists than in Al Gore's Proporanda Piece "Inconvenient Truth" which only has him and ZERO scientists to back up any of his claims.

    ...

    ...
    Last edited by Edmund129; 05-04-2013 at 11:14 AM.

  20. #45
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    Ed.. No one is disputing the little ice age or the MEP. You just continue to ignore the fact that these changes took 700 years to happen vs. the 40 that it has taken the current warming. This has already been explained to you several times and you had NO RESPONSE except to rant.

    Also Mcmanns graph has been updated 100 times by other climate research facilities and they all look the same.
    Even the B.E.S.T study funded by the koch brothers backs up the current warming.

    Obviously 100% of climate facilities disagree with your conclusions since they still say climate change is occuring. Also I seriously have to ask. Why do you continue to post blurry screen shots of a movie and avoid posting the actual source material? Is it because the source material doesn't agree with the movies altered graphs? Or just that the graph doesn't say what you want it to say.

    P.S. How many forums do you spam on a daily basis? I know you are currently spamming 2.

    For those that are interested. Ed called me a scietific illiterate and listed 6 arguments. I dismentalled all 6. Ed rebutted 2 of 6 and than rebutted 0 of 6.
    http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=189077
    Starts on post 6.

    Do I really need to inform these people on your views on espestos?

    That is because you are a Scientific Illiterate retard driven by your Left Leaning Fascist Style Marxist beliefs. You aren't interested in real Environmental issues, you are more interested in using the iron fist of the government to squeeze more money, jobs, time and resources out of innocent people which have done nothing wrong but simply be normal human beings. But in your sick twisted mind all humans are an evil corrupt influence on the Environment, like humans were some sort of space aliens that landed here a couple of years ago and don't belong here.

    You keep ignoring the real scientific facts:

    1) Water vapor is 270 times the greenhouse gas compared to what CO2 is, and is more than 100 times the concentration in the Earths' atmosphere than what CO2 is, and has more than twice as many absorption bands in the infrared spectrum than what CO2 has.

    2) While water vapor makes up 40,000 ppm (Parts Per Million) in our atmosphere, CO2 only makes up 380 ppm. That means that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, not CO2. Why aren't you trying to reduce water vapor in the atmosphere instead of CO2?

    3) You claim that greenhouse gases cause a greater temperature swing than no greenhouse gases. When the facts say exactly the opposite. The moon is just as far away from the sun as the Earth, but because it doesn't have any greenhouse gases there is a 500 degree swing between day time temperatures and night time temperatures. The largest swing on The earth ever measured was in a desert (free of most greenhouse gases like water vapor) with about a 100 degree swing. Most of the time there are only a few degrees swing in temperature between day time temperatures and night time temperatures on the Earth. Clearly proving that greenhouse gases bring temperature and climate stability; not instability.

    4) As proven by the climate record the current temperature swings are the smallest ever recorded in the climate record. (Source: Dr. Richard Lindzen Senior Fellow Climatologist at MIT and Leed Scientific Reviewer at the IPCC)

    5) The solar cycles more closely resemble earth's temperature cycle than does greenhouse changes. Clearly proving that most of the earth's climate is driven by the sun, not greenhouse gases.

    ....

    Last edited by Edmund129; 05-04-2013 at 11:17 AM.

  21. #46
    Spector567 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    52

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    That is because you are a Scientific Illiterate retard driven by your Left Leaning Fascist Style Marxist beliefs. You aren't interested in real Environmental issues, you are more interested in using the iron fist of the government to squeeze more money, jobs, time and resources out of innocent people which have done nothing wrong but simply be normal human beings. But in your sick twisted mind all humans are an evil corrupt influence on the Environment, like humans were some sort of space aliens that landed here a couple of years ago and don't belong here.

    You keep ignoring the real scientific facts:
    So in short you have no rebuttal to any of the other facts you got wrong.

    1) Water vapor is 270 times the greenhouse gas compared to what CO2 is, and is more than 100 times the concentration in the Earths' atmosphere than what CO2 is, and has more than twice as many absorption bands in the infrared spectrum than what CO2 has.
    I'll let richard Linzen respond to you.

    According to an April 30, 2012 New York Times article, "Dr. Lindzen accepts the elementary tenets of climate science. He agrees that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, calling people who dispute that point "nutty." He agrees that the level of it is rising because of human activity and that this should warm the climate."

    2) While water vapor makes up 40,000 ppm (Parts Per Million) in our atmosphere, CO2 only makes up 380 ppm. That means that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, not CO2. Why aren't you trying to reduce water vapor in the atmosphere instead of CO2?
    They have different absorption ranges and chemical properties. So your density comparison is stupid.

    Also yes Water vapor is the greater green house gas. No-one disputes this. It's already factored into the current models.
    Just because Co2 isn't number 1 does not mean that it doesn't' have an effect. In fact increasing Co2 raises the temperature and thus increases the amount of water vapor the atmosphere can hold. In short it's a feed back effect.

    3) You claim that greenhouse gases cause a greater temperature swing than no greenhouse gases. When the facts say exactly the opposite. The moon is just as far away from the sun as the Earth, but because it doesn't have any greenhouse gases there is a 500 degree swing between day time temperatures and night time temperatures. The largest swing on The earth ever measured was in a desert (free of most greenhouse gases like water vapor) with about a 100 degree swing. Most of the time there are only a few degrees swing in temperature between day time temperatures and night time temperatures on the Earth. Clearly proving that greenhouse gases bring temperature and climate stability; not instability.
    Actually I never claimed that it caused greater temperature swing. I actually believe it causes less. Hence why most of the temperature records have been set at night.

    However, I'd love for you tell me where you got that claim from. Because it's pure stupidity. However, I understand how you like to create straw man arguments.

    4) As proven by the climate record the current temperature swings are the smallest ever recorded in the climate record. (Source: Dr. Richard Lindzen Senior Fellow Climatologist at MIT and Leed Scientific Reviewer at the IPCC)
    We've already been over this. He's not the lead reviewer of anything. He wrote a portion of a single section. After I and others rebutted you ignored our responses and than spammed the board.

    However once again lets Listen to richard
    According to an April 30, 2012 New York Times article, "Dr. Lindzen accepts the elementary tenets of climate science. He agrees that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, calling people who dispute that point "nutty." He agrees that the level of it is rising because of human activity and that this should warm the climate."

    5) The solar cycles more closely resemble earth's temperature cycle than does greenhouse changes. Clearly proving that most of the earth's climate is driven by the sun, not greenhouse gases.

    ....
    Oops did you miss my previous link to you.
    Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global warming?
    http://youtu.be/_Sf_UIQYc20



    Yep you'll notice that the global warming swindle movie LIED about the graph and doctored the solar cycle for the last 40 years.
    We have also already been over this.


    You cannot continue to ignore peoples rebuttals ED. We've been over every single one of these facts before.
    Spamming the board is not an answer. It just proves that you are unable to rebut any of our points and that you were caught misleading people again. Even the people who you think agree with you. don't agree with you. They think your nutty.


    Can you or can you nut rebut anything I have said? If you cannot than you have to accept that once again you were wrong or had erroneous arguments.

  22. #47
    Beacon is offline Antiauthoritarian skeptic
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Is Eireannach mise
    Posts
    1,219

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    [QUOTE=Edmund129;52884]This CO2 / Solar cycle plot comes from NASA and the IPCC. This Video Documentary the "Great Global Warming Swindle" discusses these two plots.

    I dont want second hand opinion from WHERE in Nasa does the plot come? wher is the actual original source?
    This CO2 / Solar cycle plot comes from NASA and the IPCC. This Video Documentary the "Great Global Warming Swindle" discusses these two plots.
    Again Im interested in facts and not opinion about them based on second hand information. what is the actual primary source from NBASA or the IPCC? Who is the actual person publishing and what claim are they making or what do they say in their data or paper which you claim?

    The sun has more than just the well known 11 year sunspot cycle, There is also a 22 year Magnetic flip cycle and about another half dozen other cycles that effect the peaks of the 11 year sunspot cycle peaks.
    Yea. and????
    so what?we know the Sun has an eleven year cycle. We know the temperature of the Earth goes up and down during those eleven years.

    But the point is that the average base temperature still goes UP while the up and down solar cycle occurs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    Watch the Video in the original Posting. The Solar / CO2 / Temperature graph was published by NASA and the IPCC over 10 years ago.
    Tung and Camp derive a value for the earth's climate sensitivity to raised CO2 that is completely independent of the so-called "IPCC's accepted sensitivity".

    Their value is (see equation 2 on line 379 of their manuscript):

    2.3 oK < DeltaT(2xCO2) < 4.1 oK

    In other words according to Tung and Camp, the Earth warms by around 3 oC (plus/minus a bit) for each doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration.
    Her is the source:
    http://depts.washington.edu/amath/re.../solar-jgr.pdf
    It had been first discovered in 1893 by Edward W. Maunder that solar cycles that had been observed for century's, since the days of Gallelao, to have a very close correlation with Earth's average Temperature and Climate. And all of NASA's data has supported that fact for most of its existance, until Government grant money was waved in their faces to change their minds.
    The Tung and Camp research is independent of NASA!
    Nobody has suggested that temperature does not go up and down as sloar max/and min occur. we have not been measuring worldwide temperature since Ancient Greece Galileo or even Mauder. But we do have accurate direct measurements for the past century or so. Thiose measurements show a continual INCREASE in global temperatures
    i.e. global Warming. Whether this warming is caused by greenhouse gasses is a different issue to whether the warming exists. You are in denial if you dont accept the warming exists! It is a widely accepted scientific supported fact.

    Climate myths: The cooling after 1940 shows CO2 does not cause warming - environment - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist
    https://www2.ucar.edu/climate/faq/ho...last-100-years
    The year 2012 was the warmest on record for the contiguous United States, according to the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).
    2012 was substantially warmer—a full degree Fahrenheit (0.6°C)—than any other year since national records began in 1895.

    But unlike you I wont continue to cherry pick out certain years and offer no source. Just go here and look at a decades:
    Climate at a Glance

    Please don't offer third hand opinion from a movie/video but try to provide sourced data.

    Which links to
    Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Which says:

    Since 1978, output from the Sun has been precisely measured by satellites.[94] These measurements indicate that the Sun's output has not increased since 1978, so the warming during the past 30 years cannot be attributed to an increase in solar energy reaching the Earth. In the three decades since 1978, the combination of solar and volcanic activity probably had a slight cooling influence on the climate

  23. #48
    fromthehood is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    64

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Here, my two cents.

    1)Global Warming real? Yes.
    2)Is it human made? At least partially.
    3)What we can do about it? Almost nothing.
    4)Why we can do nothing? Because India/China together put new coal/oil plant online almost on weekly basic. You can not compete at all if you suddenly mandate that all energy is renewable. You crash your economy completely. Without all major players on board, fighting Global Warming is like swimming in a boat full of holes.

  24. #49
    Beacon is offline Antiauthoritarian skeptic
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Is Eireannach mise
    Posts
    1,219

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Fromthehood
    Your argument is based on point 4 which isnt supported
    India Steps Up Climate Change Efforts | Worldwatch Institute
    May 17, 2013
    two weeks ago, in a surprising reversal, India agreed to quantify its efforts to mitigate climate change. Ramesh said India would reduce emissions by "a broadly indicative number," although the reductions would still not be bound by international law.
    At the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate in Italy in July, India joined 16 other countries in declaring that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels should not exceed 2 degrees Celsius. This goal remains somewhat controversial, however, as there is still no clear agreement on how countries will share the burden for reducing global emissions.

    I mean put it this way Russia and china have nukes . Should we therefore say "well lets not try to reduce the number of nukes in the world" and not bother encouraging the US China Russia etc. deescalating?

    Should we not encourage countries which have public beheadings to stop having them because they already have them and claim it is "traditional" ?

    Let me take the same argument into psychology or business and economucs
    Ever heard of The Prisoner's Dilemma?
    Prisoner's dilemma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Economics focus: Playing games with the planet | The Economist
    The paper cites a study on the subject by an American academic, Robert Axelrod, which argues that the most successful strategy when the game is repeated has three elements: first, players should start out by co-operating; second, they should deter betrayals by punishing the transgressor in the next round; and third, they should not bear grudges but instead should start co-operating with treacherous players again after meting out the appropriate punishment. The result of this strategy can be sustained co-operation rather than a cycle of recrimination.

    Mr Liebreich believes that all this holds lessons for the world's climate negotiators
    So whether ethically based or not, it can be scientifically shown that co operation for mutual interest is a better strategy than self - interest. I think this reasoning is attractive to both the Taoist and Confucian elements of the Chinese society.

  25. #50
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by fromthehood View Post
    Here, my two cents.

    1)Global Warming real? Yes.
    Global Warming Threat is not real. The Holocene Maximum was 6 to 8 degrees warmer than today, and was like that for 7000 years (as illustrated in earlier graphs); it started 10,000 years ago and ended 3,000 years ago. The Medieval Warm Period was 1.5 degrees warmer than today (as illustrated in earlier graphs published by the IPCC) and lasted 500 years; started in 800 A.D. and ended in 1300 A.D.; The Little Ice Age started in 1300 A.D. and we are still in the little Ice Age. We are still 1.5 degrees cooler than the Medieval Warm Period. So we are not entering into a warmer period, we are still in the little ice age and have not yet come out of it.

    During the Holocene Maximum humans discovered Agriculture which lead to the bronze age and the iron age and 7000 years of peaceful human civilizations. During the Medieval Warm period Viking discovered Greenland and called it Greenland because of its green graph vines, which they turned into wine and other products that they traded with Europe for 3 century's on. During the Medieval Warm Period Scotland and Norway were able to grow crops of grapes and produce wine which lead to great wealth and prosperity in Europe that lead to the great period of Cathedral and Castle building. Everytime there is a period of warming it has brought about great wealth and prosperity for humans and nature. However during the Little Ice Age that brought us century's of famine, pestilence and plagues. Along with wars and mass migration from Europe to the America's.


    Quote Originally Posted by fromthehood View Post

    2)Is it human made? At least partially.
    Not even close. Water Vapor is 270 times the greenhouse gas than what CO2 is and makes up 40,000ppm (4%) of the Earth's atmosphere. CO2 only makes up 380ppm (0.038%) of the Earth's Atmosphere. Humans only produce 6.5 billion tons of CO2 per year and the Earth's atmosphere weighs 6.93 Quadrillion tons. If you bother to do the math and divide 6.5 billion tons by 6.93 Quadrillion tons; humans only produce less than 1ppm (Parts Per Million) or Less than 0.0001% of all the CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere. Human CO2 causes less than 1 Fempto Degree of temperature change (0.000000000000001 degrees) per year.

    Quote Originally Posted by fromthehood View Post


    3)What we can do about it? Almost nothing.
    80% of all Scientists and Climatologists can't even agree on what the ideal temperature of the Earth should be, but that will not stop the environmental fascist from inventing crimes out of none crimes, taxing everyone; especially the poorest of the poor, killing good paying jobs, stealing peoples property and starving millions to death and justifying mass genocide of billions of people around the world in the name of Environmental Fascism.

    Quote Originally Posted by fromthehood View Post
    4)Why we can do nothing? Because India/China together put new coal/oil plant online almost on weekly basic. You can not compete at all if you suddenly mandate that all energy is renewable. You crash your economy completely. Without all major players on board, fighting Global Warming is like swimming in a boat full of holes.
    Just Remember that in 1486 the Pope blamed Witches for global cooling and that lead to the mass genocide of 10's of thousands of witches in Europe, America and around the world for century by torturing, killing and burning at the steak convicted witches for changing the Earth's climate. Man Made Global Warming is even more stupid than global cooling, except this time you and I are the witches that they plan on burning at the steak this time. It is amazing how after 500 years or so, that the same frauds in charge of the world then are still in charge today and making the exact same claims to grab on to power and to hang on to power over the rest of us.
    Last edited by Edmund129; 05-26-2013 at 10:51 PM.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed on this website are solely those of their respective authors.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41