Global Warming’s Kaput; 2008 Coolest in 5 Years

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

30,000 children die of starvation every day in the world.

If 25,000 die one day, that does not mean the problem is getting better.

The trend for global warming is in fact, warming. At least with the data we have for decades.

The end result may very well be an ice age of some sort, but that does even mean that the problem of 'carbonization' of the atmosphere is resolved. Carbon is causing far more problems than just warming.

The US is responsible for more carbon emissions than any other country, however that will not last long since India and China are industrializing at a pace we cannot even dream of.

I have no kids, I burn 100K gallons of Jet A every year, and I am still trying to do my part to help reduce my footprint at home, at work, wherever I can. But in the end, this will not affect me in the least. It will affect the generations after me.

Funny, somehow, I still actually care

It may be warming and the trends indicate this might be true. My questions are more around who/what is causing it. Looking at "known" history of the planet would "indicate" this "warming" trend is part of the planets natural cycles.

There is a reason the GWing alarmist want to name CO2 as a polutant. And that reason is not because it is.....

It's so refreshing to find in SC a post on global warming completely devoid of any scientific understanding. Facts are overrated. Thank you, sir. You do your fellow SC readers proud.

Thany You
It has been fun

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Comparing data from the last five years to data from before humans existed is like telling a cancer patient that they are not dying after each breath.

"See, you got another breath. Surely you're not dying."

Hey, I will use the data they have from before humans to defend that GWing is hype. That is one of the main reasons I think the level the GWing alarmists go to is so nutty.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[BikerBabe 0]

Quote

Quote

wow marc, you assume i was talking to you. I really wasn't. And i wasn't insinuating anything except that I think it's the right thing to do to live and act responsibly toward our environment. I actually dislike the way replies are listed on this board for this very reason. I'm replying to the thread in general, but it has to put a name there.

but if you want to feel guilty, go ahead.

I know who you were talking to. But, you insinuate to those that dont agree with you that they want to polute and destroy the planet. Sorry, but you called called on that bull shit

Well, you insinuate that people who don't agree with you are delusional and crazy. I feel I am neither, so I guess I'm calling you on that bullshit.

Do you see how this is unproductive and silly?

I guess what i still don't understand is why you are so vehemently opposed to practicing ecological responsibility. I really don't understand, and i'm not saying that to be condescending or pedantic...i truly don't understand. Perhaps our world views are just too different, i'm not sure.

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[quade 4]

House of Cards Effect.

If some people admit certain key things, then much of what their world view is based on collapses.

It's essentially the same thing that keeps most fundamentalist religions believing in certain mythology even though that mythology has been pretty much disproved and discounted by the rest of society.

For instance, no matter what somebody tells me, I'm probably going to believe the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second (or pretty darn close to it). If my view of that changed significantly, I would have to rethink my position on a number of topics from how long a piece of wire needs to be to in a video editing system, how far away communication satellites are in the Clarke Belt, how radar works and how old the observable universe is. That would be a pretty big change.

Even though I don't agree with Rush on much of what is discussed here, I understand -why- he holds on to his beliefs.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Hey, I will use the data they have from before humans to defend that GWing is hype. That is one of the main reasons I think the level the GWing alarmists go to is so nutty.

We eagerly await the details of your rigorous analysis of that data. Can you tell us in which peer reviewed scientific journal your groundbreaking research will be published?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[billvon 3,096]

Just when Newsmax has the latest most excellent spin, along comes the real world to mess everything up once again:

==========================
Arctic becomes an island as ice melts

By Auslan Cramb
Last Updated: 4:01pm BST 31/08/2008

The North Pole has become an island for the first time in human history as climate change has made it possible to circumnavigate the Arctic ice cap.

The historic development was revealed by satellite images taken last week showing that both the north-west and north-east passages have been opened by melting ice.
===========================
Melting ice opens up North-west and North-east passages simultaneously.

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
Sunday, 31 August 2008

Open water now stretches all the way round the Arctic, making it possible for the first time in human history to circumnavigate the North Pole, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. New satellite images, taken only two days ago, show that melting ice last week opened up both the fabled North-west and North-east passages, in the most important geographical landmark to date to signal the unexpectedly rapid progress of global warming.

Last night Professor Mark Serreze, a sea ice specialist at the official US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), hailed the publication of the images – on an obscure website by scientists at the University of Bremen, Germany – as "a historic event." Some scientists predict that it could vanish altogether in summer within five years, a process that would, in itself, greatly accelerate.

But Sarah Palin, John McCain's new running mate, holds that the scientific consensus that global warming is melting Arctic ice is unreliable.
=========================

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

wow marc, you assume i was talking to you. I really wasn't. And i wasn't insinuating anything except that I think it's the right thing to do to live and act responsibly toward our environment. I actually dislike the way replies are listed on this board for this very reason. I'm replying to the thread in general, but it has to put a name there.

but if you want to feel guilty, go ahead.

I know who you were talking to. But, you insinuate to those that dont agree with you that they want to polute and destroy the planet. Sorry, but you called called on that bull shit

Well, you insinuate that people who don't agree with you are delusional and crazy. I feel I am neither, so I guess I'm calling you on that bullshit.

Do you see how this is unproductive and silly?

I guess what i still don't understand is why you are so vehemently opposed to practicing ecological responsibility. I really don't understand, and i'm not saying that to be condescending or pedantic...i truly don't understand. Perhaps our world views are just too different, i'm not sure.

First off, I am not the one that says we all have to change our way of life because we (I/You) are destroying the planet. And you make the claim without any scientific backing.

Second, I grew up on a farm. I have seen and supported changes to reduce environmental damage.

Third, You are the one claiming my views are so bad as they will destroy the planet.

You have no bull shit to call. You have your retoric and the I cant believe you dont understand (see billvons arrogance and elitist thread) mentality.

Why? Because I am not against what you say I am against.

I am against radical ecologic claims that you seem to support

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Just when Newsmax has the latest most excellent spin, along comes the real world to mess everything up once again:

==========================
Arctic becomes an island as ice melts

By Auslan Cramb
Last Updated: 4:01pm BST 31/08/2008

The North Pole has become an island for the first time in human history as climate change has made it possible to circumnavigate the Arctic ice cap.

The historic development was revealed by satellite images taken last week showing that both the north-west and north-east passages have been opened by melting ice.
===========================
Melting ice opens up North-west and North-east passages simultaneously.

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
Sunday, 31 August 2008

Open water now stretches all the way round the Arctic, making it possible for the first time in human history to circumnavigate the North Pole, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. New satellite images, taken only two days ago, show that melting ice last week opened up both the fabled North-west and North-east passages, in the most important geographical landmark to date to signal the unexpectedly rapid progress of global warming.

Last night Professor Mark Serreze, a sea ice specialist at the official US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), hailed the publication of the images – on an obscure website by scientists at the University of Bremen, Germany – as "a historic event." Some scientists predict that it could vanish altogether in summer within five years, a process that would, in itself, greatly accelerate.

But Sarah Palin, John McCain's new running mate, holds that the scientific consensus that global warming is melting Arctic ice is unreliable.
=========================

Bill, the more I learn the more I think these are normal climatic cycles. Historical studies support this thought. Ic e thaws and goes away. Temps cool and ice comes back. See how easy that is?

And you bring back consensus. What a fucking joke. See a post by nergirl. She nailed what science is. Consensus it (science) is not. Not to mention you dont even have a true claim on that. But that is another thread........

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,096]

>Bill, the more I learn the more I think these are normal climatic cycles.

Your first post was about how the planet was cooling. The above seems to indicate that you think it's warming but it's a natural cycle. Which one is it?

>And you bring back consensus.

Actually I didn't. Perhaps you were reading the wrong post again.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Bill, the more I learn the more I think these are normal climatic cycles.

Your first post was about how the planet was cooling. The above seems to indicate that you think it's warming but it's a natural cycle. Which one is it?

>And you bring back consensus.

Actually I didn't. Perhaps you were reading the wrong post again.

On concensus. You are correct. I was in error regarding your post.

And, as to the articel, even I (as I have indicated in THIS thread) is somewhat suspect in its value.

As for my position, extreemly consistant despite your attempts to label as otherwise

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lawrocket 3]

Shouldn't that be "known human history?". It could have happened in 1300 (when vieyards grew on Greenland) but nobody had thought about circumnavigating it.

That is spin, bill. It isn't verifiable. Perhaps "for the first time we know about" or "for the first time in the human record?".

It seems that's not a powerful enough statement, eh? To say, "no human record exists."

Let us not fight spin with spin. That is my biggest issue.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,096]

>As for my position, extreemly consistant . . .

OK. So what is it? Is the planet cooling or warming? Simple question.

[quade 4]

Quote

>As for my position, extreemly consistant . . .

OK. So what is it? Is the planet cooling or warming? Simple question.

I think he's just a big fan of Groucho Marx.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[BikerBabe 0]

Quote

First off, I am not the one that says we all have to change our way of life because we (I/You) are destroying the planet. And you make the claim without any scientific backing.

There's plenty of scientific backing. All of which has been repeatedly cited in this thread and others. To me, it's evidence. To you, it is not. We then get back to a question i posed to you a long time ago. If the countless scientific studies (vetted and peer-reviewed) aren't enough to convince you, then what evidence WOULD convince you?

I would make an assumption that there will never be ANY evidence enough to convince you, thus arguing the point with you is unproductive.

But now i'm to the point of defending myself against veiled personal attacks when i have never done anything to warrant it but disagree with you and perhaps ask you some tough questions.

Quote

Third, You are the one claiming my views are so bad as they will destroy the planet.

Find a quote, please. I never claimed that.

Quote

Because I am not against what you say I am against.

Then what are you against? why are we discussing this?

Are you implying that i'm an elitist because I think ecological responsibility is the right thing to do? I could turn it around and call you an elitist for implying that my beliefs are somehow stupid or wrong. To me this issue isn't about elitism at all.

By the way, you are perfectly free to not change your life in the slightest, but then again, I am also perfectly free to believe that you are wrong in doing so. If you don't think i'm free to believe that, well then, we have other issues, such as hypocrisy, to discuss.

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Bill, the more I learn the more I think these are normal climatic cycles. Historical studies support this thought. Ic e thaws and goes away. Temps cool and ice comes back. See how easy that is?

And you bring back consensus. What a fucking joke. See a post by nergirl. She nailed what science is. Consensus it (science) is not. Not to mention you dont even have a true claim on that. But that is another thread........

What was it nerdgirl said? Oh yeah, "Concisely: Yes, anthropogenic climate change is occurring."

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>As for my position, extreemly consistant . . .

OK. So what is it? Is the planet cooling or warming? Simple question.

I has been waming. It is begining it apear that this part of the cycle is over. We may now be seeing the start of a cooling period

As some have concluded. CO2 levels trail temp changes not CO2 levels are a deading factor

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Bill, the more I learn the more I think these are normal climatic cycles. Historical studies support this thought. Ic e thaws and goes away. Temps cool and ice comes back. See how easy that is?

And you bring back consensus. What a fucking joke. See a post by nergirl. She nailed what science is. Consensus it (science) is not. Not to mention you dont even have a true claim on that. But that is another thread........

What was it nerdgirl said? Oh yeah, "Concisely: Yes, anthropogenic climate change is occurring."

I said she nailed what science is. I did not say I agreed with her conclusion now did I?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,138]

Quote

Quote

>As for my position, extreemly consistant . . .

OK. So what is it? Is the planet cooling or warming? Simple question.

I has been waming. It is begining it apear that this part of the cycle is over. We may now be seeing the start of a cooling period

As some have concluded. CO2 levels trail temp changes not CO2 levels are a deading factor

So you're claiming that the very good match between the measured increase in the amount of atmospheric CO2 and the amount humans are putting into the atmosphere is just coincidence?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>As for my position, extreemly consistant . . .

OK. So what is it? Is the planet cooling or warming? Simple question.

I has been waming. It is begining it apear that this part of the cycle is over. We may now be seeing the start of a cooling period

As some have concluded. CO2 levels trail temp changes not CO2 levels are a deading factor

So you're claiming that the very good match between the measured increase in the amount of atmospheric CO2 and the amount humans are putting into the atmosphere is just coincidence?

What I am saying is temps affect CO2 levels not the other way aroung as the Man made global warming crowd ckaim.

IE; Temps go up, CO2 levels go up.
Temps go down, CO2 levels follow accordingly.

Nothing to do (for the most part) with humans

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,138]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>As for my position, extreemly consistant . . .

OK. So what is it? Is the planet cooling or warming? Simple question.

I has been waming. It is begining it apear that this part of the cycle is over. We may now be seeing the start of a cooling period

As some have concluded. CO2 levels trail temp changes not CO2 levels are a deading factor

So you're claiming that the very good match between the measured increase in the amount of atmospheric CO2 and the amount humans are putting into the atmosphere is just coincidence?

What I am saying is temps affect CO2 levels not the other way aroung as the Man made global warming crowd ckaim.

IE; Temps go up, CO2 levels go up.
Temps go down, CO2 levels follow accordingly.

Nothing to do (for the most part) with humans

So you ARE claiming that the very good match between the measured increase in the amount of atmospheric CO2 and the amount humans are putting into the atmosphere is just coincidence?


We spew 20 billion tons into the atmosphere. Measurements show the atmosphere contains 20 billion more tons of CO2 than before: COINCIDENCE!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>As for my position, extreemly consistant . . .

OK. So what is it? Is the planet cooling or warming? Simple question.

I has been waming. It is begining it apear that this part of the cycle is over. We may now be seeing the start of a cooling period

As some have concluded. CO2 levels trail temp changes not CO2 levels are a deading factor

So you're claiming that the very good match between the measured increase in the amount of atmospheric CO2 and the amount humans are putting into the atmosphere is just coincidence?

What I am saying is temps affect CO2 levels not the other way aroung as the Man made global warming crowd ckaim.

IE; Temps go up, CO2 levels go up.
Temps go down, CO2 levels follow accordingly.

Nothing to do (for the most part) with humans

So you ARE claiming that the very good match between the measured increase in the amount of atmospheric CO2 and the amount humans are putting into the atmosphere is just coincidence?


We spew 20 billion tons into the atmosphere. Measurements show the atmosphere contains 20 billion more tons of CO2 than before: COINCIDENCE!

I dont know what you are trying to spin here


Temps go up in a natural cycle and CO2 levels follow. When the cycle reverses itself and the Temps go down, CO2 levels will go down following the temp decrease.

Your claim is that CO2 is raising temps significantly. I dont think so.

Now, how you going to spin this?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,096]

>I has been waming. It is begining it apear that this part of the cycle is
>over. We may now be seeing the start of a cooling period.

Cool, an answer! Thank you.

>As some have concluded. CO2 levels trail temp changes not CO2
>levels are a deading factor . . .

You mean, except for this time, right?

[kallend 2,138]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>As for my position, extreemly consistant . . .

OK. So what is it? Is the planet cooling or warming? Simple question.

I has been waming. It is begining it apear that this part of the cycle is over. We may now be seeing the start of a cooling period

As some have concluded. CO2 levels trail temp changes not CO2 levels are a deading factor

So you're claiming that the very good match between the measured increase in the amount of atmospheric CO2 and the amount humans are putting into the atmosphere is just coincidence?

What I am saying is temps affect CO2 levels not the other way aroung as the Man made global warming crowd ckaim.

IE; Temps go up, CO2 levels go up.
Temps go down, CO2 levels follow accordingly.

Nothing to do (for the most part) with humans

So you ARE claiming that the very good match between the measured increase in the amount of atmospheric CO2 and the amount humans are putting into the atmosphere is just coincidence?


We spew 20 billion tons into the atmosphere. Measurements show the atmosphere contains 20 billion more tons of CO2 than before: COINCIDENCE!

I dont know what you are trying to spin here

It's one of the minor laws of chemistry, called "conservation of matter". Nothing for you deniers to worry about.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

It's one of the minor laws of chemistry, called "conservation of matter". Nothing for you deniers to worry about.

Indeed.

Rush - where exactly is this CO2 coming from and going to? Your hypothesis would require that the oceans would absorb more carbon dioxide when the temperature is cooler, then emit it when temps go up. This would be consistent with the norm that a liquid's saturation level is lower as the temp goes up.

Unfortunately, this isn't actually reflected by the water temps, or the acidity of the water (a big concern with higher CO2), so I believe it's shot down quickly by science taught to undergrads.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Bill, the more I learn the more I think these are normal climatic cycles. Historical studies support this thought. Ic e thaws and goes away. Temps cool and ice comes back. See how easy that is?

And you bring back consensus. What a fucking joke. See a post by nergirl. She nailed what science is. Consensus it (science) is not. Not to mention you dont even have a true claim on that. But that is another thread........

What was it nerdgirl said? Oh yeah, "Concisely: Yes, anthropogenic climate change is occurring."

I said she nailed what science is. I did not say I agreed with her conclusion now did I?

Marg once hypothesized that she is incorrect from time to time. Since that time, data has suggested that her hypothesis was very probably erroneous, and should be rejected.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!