Global Warming

[TheCoolinator]

If you're saying that seasons exist and there is a cycle of cooling and warming than I agree but I must stand firm on the ground that this whole Man made Global warming stuff is nothing more than a very intricate ruse. A cynical trick played on the public using emotionally charged end-of-the-world rhetoric.

Problem, Reaction, Solution.


Ex-Climate change Scientist Speaks out on his doubts about Man Made Global Warming.

There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:

1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.

2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.

3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). Land-based temperature readings are corrupted by the "urban heat island" effect: urban areas encroaching on thermometer stations warm the micro-climate around the thermometer, due to vegetation changes, concrete, cars, houses. Satellite data is the only temperature data we can trust, but it only goes back to 1979. NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling. The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling.


4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.

The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming. Evidence consists of observations made by someone at some time that supports the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/no-smoking-hot-spot/story-e6frg73o-1111116945238

.................

Originally Posted by Zhukov

I don't think you should write off global warming mainly or even partly based on the fact that ruling classes are taking advantage of the hysteria behind it; they do that with everything.

That's fine,

I'm just glad your aware of their manipulation but this is not just taking advantage of a situation this is actually creating the situation and funding a bottom up movement to force an agenda.

[Colonel Flagg]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

If you're saying that seasons exist and there is a cycle of cooling and warming than I agree

My God, can you really be this dense?

I've only used the ignore feature once. I can't say this anymore.

[Pentegarn]

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg

My God, can you really be this dense?

I've only used the ignore feature once. I can't say this anymore.

I gotta know, who was your first?

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg

Coolie has constantly harped on how carbon trading and taxation is wrong, and that we are idiots for buying into this.
................................
He doesn't ask, he YELLS
...................................
My God, can you really be this dense? I've only used the ignore feature once. I can't say this anymore.

I don't remember calling anyone an idiot, Nor do I remember yelling, if that's even possible through this communication medium. Maybe if I used caps a lot....which I didn't. I do remember getting called names on numerous occasions though. Names like "idiot", "Conspiracy theorist", and "naive"

Either way, having a tantrum and ignoring an opposing viewpoint doesn't really help your argument out too much. Just look at the bright side. We both believe seasons exist.

[Tadao]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

I don't remember calling anyone an idiot or yelling, if that's even possible through this communication medium. Maybe if I used caps a lot....which I didn't. I do remember getting called names on numerous occasions though. Names like "idiot", "Conspiracy theorist", and "naive"

Either way, having a tantrum and ignoring an opposing viewpoint doesn't really help your argument out too much. Just look at the bright side. We both believe seasons exist.

He can now.

[Pentegarn]

Originally Posted by Tadao

He can now.

[Colonel Flagg]

Originally Posted by Tadao

He can now.

Thanks T.

Coolio, I think I was incredibly patient with you, trying to tease out of you something other than rhetoric to support your position on the AGW hypothesis. I even admitted agreeing with a portion of your argument, in the context of a larger whole. I did not go so far as to correct your scientific blunders nor your grammar (which on the whole was OK) - this would have been obstructively rude. However, you continued to ignore or misinterpret everything I wrote, in some cases modifying my words to fit your own ends. This is the height of hypocrisy, considering you are accusing individuals of manipulating data to support AGW.

I was trying to be nice. Now, all I hear is a faint buzzing sound, and all is good.

Peace to you.

CF

[The Leader]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

ignoring an opposing viewpoint doesn't really help your argument out too much.

That's kind of what you're doing though. Go back through this thread and read Supafly's and Flagg's posts and your responses. Or heck, anyone's posts and your responses. It's almost as if you didn't even read their posts.

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

That's kind of what you're doing though. Go back through this thread and read Supafly's and Flagg's posts and your responses. Or heck, anyone's posts and your responses. It's almost as if you didn't even read their posts.

Since they're all parroting the same rhetoric I really didn't need to respond to all of them individually. They pretty much got the same response I would have given them if I was speaking to them directly.