Environmental stupidity on display

[Andy]

The eco-idiots were on display recently. While many parts of the US had record cold winters, while the Antarctic has reached record breaking levels of ice, and while Washington itself was under one foot of late season snow, they gathered to claim CO2 was causing global warming.

Only the most retarded among us would hold an "earth is warming, globe is burning" rally in the middle of a way out of season 1-foot of snow. Make you wonder if anyone of them understand anything about science.

 

[HankHill]

Lol, thanks I needed a good morning laugh. I guess since CO2 is causing global warming, we should all hold our breath for 1 hour a day to decrease our contribution to this global catastrophe.

Someone should tell Al Gore-lioni that he needs to curb all the hot air he is releasing into the atmosphere. I love how he flies around on his jet to spread the news of global warming. Or when he is sitting comfortably in his house that takes about $10,000 per month to power.

Typical liberal, do what I say, not what I do.

 

[PLC1]

The eco-idiots were on display recently. While many parts of the US had record cold winters, while the Antarctic has reached record breaking levels of ice, and while Washington itself was under one foot of late season snow, they gathered to claim CO2 was causing global warming.

Only the most retarded among us would hold an "earth is warming, globe is burning" rally in the middle of a way out of season 1-foot of snow. Make you wonder if anyone of them understand anything about science.

Maybe they understand that global climate change is manifested by extremes of weather, not by a uniform warming of the Earth. Maybe they want others to understand that, too.

Or, maybe they just like attention and notoriety.

If not, then it might have been more effective to have held their rally in Southern California a month or so ago, when winter temps were a frigid 80 degrees.

 

[Little-Acorn]

How many of these Global Warming rallies have been cancelled due to heavy snow, extreme cold, etc. Seems to be a weekly occurance, and has been for years.

You don't suppose God is giving them a hint here?

 

[HankHill]

Maybe they understand that global climate change is manifested by extremes of weather, not by a uniform warming of the Earth. Maybe they want others to understand that, too.

Or, maybe they just like attention and notoriety.

If not, then it might have been more effective to have held their rally in Southern California a month or so ago, when winter temps were a frigid 80 degrees.

Well is used to be called Global Warming. When that was debunked, and mother nature put her 2 cents in as well, the called it "Global Climate Change".

Well news to the masses, the climate will always change, it was changing for billions of years without the presence of humans.

 

[Andy]

Maybe they understand that global climate change is manifested by extremes of weather, not by a uniform warming of the Earth. Maybe they want others to understand that, too.

Or, maybe they just like attention and notoriety.

If not, then it might have been more effective to have held their rally in Southern California a month or so ago, when winter temps were a frigid 80 degrees.

So any change in climate is due to global warming caused by industrial CO2? Record cold, and snow fall, can be due to global warming?

How many of these Global Warming rallies have been cancelled due to heavy snow, extreme cold, etc. Seems to be a weekly occurance, and has been for years.

You don't suppose God is giving them a hint here?

I doubt it. He's more likely mocking them for thinking their petty human existence could mess up the entire Earths atmosphere.

 

[PLC1]

Well is used to be called Global Warming. When that was debunked, and mother nature put her 2 cents in as well, the called it "Global Climate Change".

Well news to the masses, the climate will always change, it was changing for billions of years without the presence of humans.

Global warming was not debunked, and it has always been climate change. No one has ever argued that the Earth would just uniformly warm up. As you state, the climate of the Earth has always been changing.

Today, it is changing rather quickly. To make it more interesting, there are now six billion or so humans who are likely to be affected by said change. Those human beings were not around during the last ice age, nor during the warm period when dinosaurs were enjoying quite different kinds climates.

The climatologists tell us that the average temperature of the Earth is currently increasing, that said increase is likely to change local climates in erratic and unpredictable ways, and that it is likely that human activities are accelerating said warming.

So far, no one has debunked what science has concluded, regardless of what their political philosophy might be.

 

[HankHill]

Global warming was not debunked, and it has always been climate change. No one has ever argued that the Earth would just uniformly warm up. As you state, the climate of the Earth has always been changing.

Today, it is changing rather quickly. To make it more interesting, there are now six billion or so humans who are likely to be affected by said change. Those human beings were not around during the last ice age, nor during the warm period when dinosaurs were enjoying quite different kinds climates.

The climatologists tell us that the average temperature of the Earth is currently increasing, that said increase is likely to change local climates in erratic and unpredictable ways, and that it is likely that human activities are accelerating said warming.

So far, no one has debunked what science has concluded, regardless of what their political philosophy might be.

Sorry, I meant that humans causing Global Warming is debunked...

The popular term being splattered by Gore-lioni was "Global Warming", which flooded the media... When it got cold, that term didn't hold water as well, so Gore-lioni started using "Global Climate Change"...

The EPA goes on to say that the term "climate change" is growing in preferred use as opposed to "global warming" because "climate change" conveys that there are other changes happening to the planet, in addition to rising temperatures.

Now also, "climate change" conveying other changes = more changes = furthers the lies that can be spread by Al Gore-lioni, in order to further his agenda, which is based off of the fact that "money can be made". Never waste a good crisis, eh? Isn't that right Rahm and Hillary?

http://canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm

 

[Little-Acorn]

BTW, if these enviro-whackos were somehow to succeed (hypotheitical, obviously)... how would we know?

 

[Andy]

Global warming was not debunked, and it has always been climate change. No one has ever argued that the Earth would just uniformly warm up. As you state, the climate of the Earth has always been changing.

Today, it is changing rather quickly. To make it more interesting, there are now six billion or so humans who are likely to be affected by said change. Those human beings were not around during the last ice age, nor during the warm period when dinosaurs were enjoying quite different kinds climates.

The climatologists tell us that the average temperature of the Earth is currently increasing, that said increase is likely to change local climates in erratic and unpredictable ways, and that it is likely that human activities are accelerating said warming.

So far, no one has debunked what science has concluded, regardless of what their political philosophy might be.

Not so. There are places in northern Ireland, that today can't produce grapes, yet in times past had massive vineyards, and to this day have streets named "Vine St", and "Vineyard Lane". Further, there are pictures in England of people walking out on the frozen over English channel. Not, photographs obviously, but paintings.

The climate has always been changing pretty fast. Remember during El Nino, the super hot summers, and the relatively mild winters? Now we have record cold spells. The climate has always been change, one way or another. There is nothing special about this change, than any of the past changes.

As for the science has never been disproved, I would disagree. Science does not support any of this. The hockey stick graph that was used in 1998 at the UN, was proven to be unsupportable. The data used was flawed. The report was never reviewed before being used by socialists in government to justify more control. Meanwhile, now that it has been reviewed, all reviews have found the report lacking, incomplete and a bit bias in it's evidence.

Look up "Man made global warming hoax" on youtube or google video. It comes in multiple sections. The whole thing was aired on BBC TV in the UK.

Alternatively, you can buy the DVD from The Nicene Council online store.

 

[Andy]

BTW, if these enviro-whackos were somehow to succeed (hypotheitical, obviously)... how would we know?

In theory, we'd know because the global emission of CO2 would decrease. Of course since it's impossible to distinguish man-made CO2 from natural CO2, it would be impossible to tell scientifically.

The alternative method for determining if the eco-nutz succeeded, would be when CO2 legislation caused a world wide great depression that undoubtedly would cause not only massive starvation and world poverty, but also reduce CO2 emissions.

 

[HankHill]

The alternative method for determining if the eco-nutz succeeded, would be when CO2 legislation caused a world wide great depression that undoubtedly would cause not only massive starvation and world poverty, but also reduce CO2 emissions.

Didn't you hear? That's coming to an American theater near you! ​

 

[PLC1]

Not so. There are places in northern Ireland, that today can't produce grapes, yet in times past had massive vineyards, and to this day have streets named "Vine St", and "Vineyard Lane". Further, there are pictures in England of people walking out on the frozen over English channel. Not, photographs obviously, but paintings.

The climate has always been changing pretty fast. Remember during El Nino, the super hot summers, and the relatively mild winters? Now we have record cold spells. The climate has always been change, one way or another. There is nothing special about this change, than any of the past changes.

As for the science has never been disproved, I would disagree. Science does not support any of this. The hockey stick graph that was used in 1998 at the UN, was proven to be unsupportable. The data used was flawed. The report was never reviewed before being used by socialists in government to justify more control. Meanwhile, now that it has been reviewed, all reviews have found the report lacking, incomplete and a bit bias in it's evidence.

Look up "Man made global warming hoax" on youtube or google video. It comes in multiple sections. The whole thing was aired on BBC TV in the UK.

Alternatively, you can buy the DVD from The Nicene Council online store.

The climate has always been changing, yes. That it is changing more rapidly than in the past is most likely due in part by human activities, according to climatology.

According to politics, of course, there is either a dead certainty that mankind is ruining the planet, or no possibility at all that humans can affect the climate, according to what side you're on. Politics is good at creating BS.

Yes, there are some alarmists who have run with this issue, saying that we'd better reduce our carbon footprint or face the consequences. Science doesn't really back that one up.

It does back up the somewhat alarming proposition that the climate of the Earth is changing in ways we really can't predict very well.

What really needs to be done is to study climate change so that we do have some idea what to expect. Even if "most likely due in part" becomes "for certain anthropogenic", there really isn't much we can do about it at this point anyway.

 

[Mr.Dysfunctional]

The climate has always been changing, yes. That it is changing more rapidly than in the past is most likely due in part by human activities, according to climatology.

According to politics, of course, there is either a dead certainty that mankind is ruining the planet, or no possibility at all that humans can affect the climate, according to what side you're on. Politics is good at creating BS.

Yes, there are some alarmists who have run with this issue, saying that we'd better reduce our carbon footprint or face the consequences. Science doesn't really back that one up.

It does back up the somewhat alarming proposition that the climate of the Earth is changing in ways we really can't predict very well.

What really needs to be done is to study climate change so that we do have some idea what to expect. Even if "most likely due in part" becomes "for certain anthropogenic", there really isn't much we can do about it at this point anyway.

Then since you have finally seen the light of that fact we need "more scientific evidence" to back up said " Man-made climate change " how about you jump on our side and support vetoing any bills that would propose cap and trade and other hosts of social ideals simply to further a leftist and eco-fantic ideology.

Simply put.. how about we fix the economy first with "REAL" jobs and not get our panties in a wad about Global climate change for at least another 3 to 4 years.

 

[palerider]

Global warming was not debunked, and it has always been climate change. No one has ever argued that the Earth would just uniformly warm up. As you state, the climate of the Earth has always been changing.

Sorry guy, but some historicial research is in order for you. First it was global cooling. That got debunked. Then it was global warming. That got debunked. After a few decades of being debunked, someone got smart enough to call thier religion climate change. Hard to go wrong with that one. The problem is that the climate is always changing. As a religion, it is both genius and completly idiotic. Genius in that you can be right no matter what happens, idiotic in the sence that anyone who has even the slightest grasp of the history of the earth's climate understands that change is the one constant in the earth's climate. You throw in the absolutely unprovable mantra that we are now causing what has always happened and you have a religion.

The modern day scientists who preach AGW are no different than the priests of old who used their knowledge of eclipses and floods to frighten and therefore contoll those who were too uneducated to see the scam.

Today, it is changing rather quickly. To make it more interesting, there are now six billion or so humans who are likely to be affected by said change. Those human beings were not around during the last ice age, nor during the warm period when dinosaurs were enjoying quite different kinds climates.

And what, exactly is surprising about that? Go back 14,000 years or so ago at the time that the present warming period began, when glaciers extended a couple of thousand miles further south than they do now, all the way to texas as a matter of fact and you will see a world where there most of the land mass was covered with ice and snow. As a result, the climate was pretty steady and pretty cold all the time. Some tipping point was reached and the earth began to warm and the glaciers began to receed. The more they receeded, the more land was exposed to the sun and the more heat was retained by the earth and in turn, the more heat was present in the atmosphere. Continue exposing more earth to the sun over 14,000 years and continue warming and one doesn't even need to be a scientist to predict that as more earth is exposed to the sun the process will speed up. A child could predict it.

The climatologists tell us that the average temperature of the Earth is currently increasing, that said increase is likely to change local climates in erratic and unpredictable ways, and that it is likely that human activities are accelerating said warming.

And the honest climatologists, those who haven't been bought by environmental interests will tell us that the temperature has been risinig for the past 14,000 years and if the historical data are any indication, that the temperature trend will continue to rise until no ice exists anywhere at which time the temperature will stabalize until the beginning of the next ice age. The fact is that it is very difficult to find a climatologist who doesn't depend, in great part, on grant money from environmental interests who buys into the AGW theory. There is simply no physical law that could account for or explain how the tiny fraction that is man's contribution to a gas that amounts to only 0.117% of the total atmosphere could be driving the planet's climate. We don't even produce enough CO2 to overcome the natural deviation of the earth's natural CO2 producing machinery from year to year.

If you can name a physical law that could account for it and provide some rock solid science to prove it, I would be interested in seeing it. I am a rational being and if you can provide proof, I can accept it but I won't be swayed by half baked pseudoscience that relies in most part on computer simulations that are dead wrong 99% of the time. Hell, they can't even predict what the climate was like 100 years ago, much less the future.