RIP AGW

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Too complicated. "Deniers" works a lot better.

So does 'alarmists'.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 23]

Quote

They are called "stop light environmentalists" Call themselves green because they are to yellow to admit they are red.
Or "watermelon environmentalists" green on the outside and red in the center.

There are in my opinion two groups on the alarmits side. Those like Al Gore and the UN who are in it for the money and power. They sell there story to thier puppets. They buy it because they have a need to force the rest to live as THEY think we should. Cause we are destroying the planet and are greedy bastards (they think)

The puppets do try and live that way. The Al Gores could give a squirt less and continue to live as they please

The puppets give them a pass cause the ends justifies the means

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

[DanG 1]

Quote

There are in my opinion two groups on the deniers side. Those like oil companies, auto manufacturers, and energy companies who are in it for the money and power. They sell there story to thier puppets. They buy it because they have a need to force the rest to live as THEY think we should. Cause we are destroying the economy and are stupid sheeple (they think)

The puppets do try and live that way. The oil companies, auto manufacturers, and energy companies could give a squirt less and continue to live as they please

The puppets give them a pass cause the ends justifies the means

FIFY

- Dan G

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

There are in my opinion two groups on the deniers side. Those like oil companies, auto manufacturers, and energy companies who are in it for the money and power. They sell there story to thier puppets. They buy it because they have a need to force the rest to live as THEY think we should. Cause we are destroying the economy and are stupid sheeple (they think)

The puppets do try and live that way. The oil companies, auto manufacturers, and energy companies could give a squirt less and continue to live as they please

The puppets give them a pass cause the ends justifies the means

FIFY

Well, it is progress that you see the similarities.

As I have said many times before, AGWing has NOTHING to do with climate change

"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 3,120]

>As I have said many times before, AGWing has NOTHING to do
>with climate change

And carbon dioxide has nothing to do with the atmosphere. Heck, they're not even the same words.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>As I have said many times before, AGWing has NOTHING to do
>with climate change

And carbon dioxide has nothing to do with the atmosphere. Heck, they're not even the same words.

Back to your tap dancing again

Fun stuff for you I guess

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

[DanG 1]

Quote

Well, it is progress that you see the similarities.

Sure, the only difference being one side has heaps of scientific evidence on its side, and the other doesn't.

Quote

As I have said many times before, AGWing has NOTHING to do with climate change

Huh? That makes no sense. Climate change is a phenomenon. AGW (which is a crappy acronym, it should be ACC) theorizes the cause of that phenomenon. They have everything to do with each other.

- Dan G

[billvon 3,120]

>Back to your tap dancing again

Had a feeling you wouldn't understand. Like the man said - "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it."

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Well, it is progress that you see the similarities.

Sure, the only difference being one side has heaps of scientific evidence on its side, and the other doesn't.

Quote

As I have said many times before, AGWing has NOTHING to do with climate change

Huh? That makes no sense. Climate change is a phenomenon. AGW (which is a crappy acronym, it should be ACC) theorizes the cause of that phenomenon. They have everything to do with each other.

Nope, they have nothing to do with climate change
It has everything to do with the alarmism used to push an agenda

"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

>Back to your tap dancing again

Had a feeling you wouldn't understand. Like the man said - "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it."

I understood totally your attempt to spin what I said

are you getting tired?

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

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>As I have said many times before, AGWing has NOTHING to do
>with climate change

And carbon dioxide has nothing to do with the atmosphere. Heck, they're not even the same words.

So, where was the CO2 during the medieval warming period, 1000 years ago, when temps where higher than today?

Why didn't temperatures "runaway" during the Phanerozoic era, when CO2 was several times higher than today?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DanG 1]

Quote

Nope, they have nothing to do with climate change
It has everything to do with the alarmism used to push an agenda

Trying to discuss things with you can be very frustrating.

Let's use the same terminology: Anthropogenic Global Warming is very much related to Global Warming. The later is a physical phenomenon. Even if you don't think it is happening, the definition is quite simple. Anthropogenic is just an adjective meaning that a phenomenon is caused by the action of humans.

Whether you agree that human are affecting the climate or not, saying the two terms are not related makes no sense whatsoever.

- Dan G

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Nope, they have nothing to do with climate change
It has everything to do with the alarmism used to push an agenda

Trying to discuss things with you can be very frustrating.

Let's use the same terminology: Anthropogenic Global Warming is very much related to Global Warming. The later is a physical phenomenon. Even if you don't think it is happening, the definition is quite simple. Anthropogenic is just an adjective meaning that a phenomenon is caused by the action of humans.

Whether you agree that human are affecting the climate or not, saying the two terms are not related makes no sense whatsoever.

No

I have never said I do not think climate change is happening. It happens all the time (Naturally)

I am saying the change has nothing to do in any big way with mans activities

The fraud to say that it is is just a tactic for those pushing it to gain power and money (the al gores for power and money and puppets who believe it and want to push a life style they believe in on the rest of us under the guise of saving the planey (NO, I do not want dirty air, land and water)
Hense I call them allarmists

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

[DanG 1]

Quote

I am saying the change has nothing to do in any big way with mans activities

You could have just said that to begin with.

- Dan G

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

I am saying the change has nothing to do in any big way with mans activities

You could have just said that to begin with.

I did

"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 3,120]

>So, where was the CO2 during the medieval warming period, 1000
>years ago, when temps where higher than today?

It didn't change much. Of course, neither did temperatures; the northern hemisphere was the only place that saw any significant warming. Nowadays both hemispheres are warming at a much faster rate than during the MWP.

>Why didn't temperatures "runaway" during the Phanerozoic era, when CO2
>was several times higher than today?

Same reason they're not 'running away' today. The atmosphere is almost saturated (optically) with CO2, so doubling CO2 levels will cause only a few watts per square meter additional warming, rather than the 100 watts or so you'd expect if the relationship was linear.

[rushmc 23]

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2010/12/06/wikileaks-memos-reveal-climate-change-con-game.php


or take your pick

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=wikileaks+climate+change&aq=3&aqi=g4g-v1&aql=&oq=wikileaks+clim&gs_rfai=Cy4CLFkv9TJPiCaKyNan58cYBAAAAqgQFT9BaDBQ

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

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>So, where was the CO2 during the medieval warming period, 1000
>years ago, when temps where higher than today?

It didn't change much. Of course, neither did temperatures; the northern hemisphere was the only place that saw any significant warming. Nowadays both hemispheres are warming at a much faster rate than during the MWP.

Varied increases globally, according to studies. (attachment 1)

Quote

>Why didn't temperatures "runaway" during the Phanerozoic era, when CO2
>was several times higher than today?

Same reason they're not 'running away' today. The atmosphere is almost saturated (optically) with CO2, so doubling CO2 levels will cause only a few watts per square meter additional warming, rather than the 100 watts or so you'd expect if the relationship was linear.

Sounds like a pretty high-caliber shot in the foot for the alarmists, then.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DanG 1]

As usual, that article doesn't say what you think it says.

The fact that the US pursued displomatic efforts to get international climate change agreement does not in any way imply that anthropogenic climate change is not real.

- Dan G

[rushmc 23]

Quote

As usual, that article doesn't say what you think it says.

The fact that the US pursued displomatic efforts to get international climate change agreement does not in any way imply that anthropogenic climate change is not real.

You are right
It doesnt
But it clearly shows that the priority has nothing to do with climate

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

[DanG 1]

Again, no. All it says is that the US engaged in diplomatic efforts to get agreement in Copenhagen. There is no mention of motive. Conspiracy theorists can assign an evil motive if they choose, but no reasonable person would accept that article as support for any conluson on motive.

- Dan G

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Again, no. All it says is that the US engaged in diplomatic efforts to get agreement in Copenhagen. There is no mention of motive. Conspiracy theorists can assign an evil motive if they choose, but no reasonable person would accept that article as support for any conluson on motive.

So it is called diplomatic efforts now?

Ok

"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 3,120]

>Varied increases globally, according to studies.

Agreed. Warmer in some places, cooler in others.

>Sounds like a pretty high-caliber shot in the foot for the alarmists, then.

For people who think we're all going to die tomorrow - yes.

[DanG 1]

Quote

So it is called diplomatic efforts now?

What is called diplomatic efforts?

Try to remember that we don't know what internal dialogue is going on in your head. If you choose to use pronouns, they should clearly relate to a previously defined noun, preferably in the same post.

- Dan G

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

So it is called diplomatic efforts now?

What is called diplomatic efforts?

Try to remember that we don't know what internal dialogue is going on in your head. If you choose to use pronouns, they should clearly relate to a previously defined noun, preferably in the same post.

What ever

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