DUmmie FUnnies 06-24-08 ("We have ONE year.. ONE election")

Remember all the propaganda we were fed about how Global Warming is a non-partisan issue? Well, it turns out it was all hogwash. No big surprise there. The Left is now enlisting Global Warming alarmism on a big scale to help get Barack Obama elected as you can see in this KOmmie THREAD titled, "Hansen on Global Warming: We have ONE year.. ONE election." Yes, me must elect Obama or it will be the END OF THE WORLD!!! It turns out that James Hansen has been making Global Warming alarmist WARNINGS for at least 20 years. In 1988 he predicted severe dought was coming to the midwest. Five years later, in 1993, the Midwest experienced extreme flooding. Also check out the current flooding in the Midwest to see just how accurate Hansen has been in his predictions. One might as well consult Jean Dixon in predicting climate change. However, the KOmmies turn to Hansen as some sort of prophet to help them elect their beloved Obama. So let us now watch the KOmmies play the Global Warming Alarmist card in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, noting that the weatherman is lucky if he can predict the weather correctly just 3 days in advance, is in the [barackets]:

"I think we have a very brief window of opportunity to deal with climate change ... no longer than a decade, at the most."

Since then, things have gotten much, much worse. The Arctic ice is melting faster than expected. CO2 emissions are accelerating. Global warming is accelerating.

Hansen no longer stands by his estimate that we have one decade to turn things around. He now thinks that was too optimistic.

[You will be joining the Heavens Gate cult aboard the Mother Ship. And now to the rest of the KOmmies...]

Most coverage has focussed on his statement that oil CEOs should be prosecuted. This is interesting, but I think misses the point of his testimony.

It's time to stop Climaticide and that means working for justice as well as having the right policies. Without justice there will be cynicism and cynicism plays into the hands of the denialists and the tactics of disinformation.

[LOL! "Climaticide." I definitely have to file that word away with "Freudenschade."]

The warming of the Arctic is beginning to look irreversible. There are positive feedbacks that are amplifying inputs. Sea ice melting is causing more warming and more warm Atlantic water flowing into the Arctic.

[Gee! Then how is it that we can still watch Ice Road Truckers who drive right over the frozen Arctic ocean?]

Republican ideology will block any meaningful. Climate related reform into the foreseeable future. We all might as well accept extinction because nothing will change in the USA in terms of politics. The only conceivable circumstance that might avoid extinction of humanity is if the oil economy suffers catastrophic and irreversible loss. Which, given Republican Rapturist ideology, is always possible via warmongering, most likely Iran. Even the complete melting of Greenland won't stop the greed and selfishness of Republicans.

[EVIL Republicans!!! It's all their fault! So much for that hype about Global Warming being a non-partisan issue.]

He seems to be mixing a bunch of stuff. One moment, it is "99% certain." The next he's saying there will be 2-meter sea level rise this century, which is certanly not in IPCC projections.

Considering that we will not take power for 7 more months - we have a little problem here.

[Which will pale in comparison to the HUGE mental problem you will have in 7 months if you do NOT take power.]

Hansen's superlative reputation makes his increasingly edgy statements deeply disturbing.

For a bunch of fear-based weenies, I don't understand why the deniers aren't more scared, really.

[I'm sooooo frightened about Hansen's incredibly accurate predictions about drought in the Midwest.]

When they try to argue that climate scientists are "bought off" by the environmental lobby. Like there's big, big money in environmentalism. These guys are geniuses.

[Al Gore seems to be making a pretty penny in selling Carbon Credit indulgences.]

Also accept the fact that this century will see a human dieoff to the tune of about three billion excess deaths. The best we can do at this point is preserve accumulated knowledge and the values that go along with reducing rather than increasing violence over time. What we're headed for is a centuries-long dark age driven by the consequences of overshoot & collapse. There will be places that manage to preserve knowledge and an enlightened culture, but these will be relatively few and far between. You want to be in one of those places. Ideally a town with a small university, farming capabilities nearby, minimal risk of town-wrecking disasters such as tornados and earthquakes, and relative climate stability. Or sacrifice the "university" criterion and search based on the rest of those, looking for a healthy local economy with a mix of practical skills. Finding those places is difficult but that's what you need to do.

[I'm already picturing leftwing monks in small universities preserving our knowledge and culture on scrolls as, outside, rightwing yahoo redneck barbarians destroy civilization in their pickup trucks.]

If Obama loses the election say goodbye to Florida, NYC and any other coastal area.

I am sorting out what I think about Obama coming out today in support of corn ethanol. I was a little surprised, knowing that we have discussed here the disadvantages of using corn for fuel vs food.

You might want to repeatedly view some Holocaust pics just for the exercise. To get you toughened up. Anybody under the age of 45 is going to see things before they die that will make them sorry they're not 75 today.

I'm no skeptic. I'm a physicist trained in meteorology. I agree with much of what is written or quoted above but what Hansen has said and will say is mostly political rhetoric not scientific consensus.

I've been beseeching my parents to stockpile food for the last year, but they're generally dismissive of my concerns. What are the rest of you doing?

I'm just glad I don't have any kids, so I won't have to look them in the eye when it finally hits home to people just how screwed we are and they start looking at those of my age and older and ask. "You knew! You saw this coming, and you did nothing! Why?"

Thanks for the data... I’ve been looking for something like this to whack over google-eyed doomsday believers’ heads. There was another amazing response to a post years ago. The responder showed ice core data going back millions of years and how global warming/cooling is very cyclical.

Oops, meant to reply to ETL. But thanks anyway!

The post you apparently meant to refer to was #11. And it *did* include a graph showing the 100,000-year periodicity of major ice ages. But everyone (on both sides) is well aware of this. What my post mainly showed was that it couldn't have been CO2 that got us out of these past ice ages because temperature increases *preceded* CO2 increases throughout the past 4 such cycles, and by an average of 800 years. Also that the subsequent rising CO2 levels did NOT lead to further warming (ie, the dreaded "runaway greenhouse effect" that Gore and his friends keep warning us about). All of this directly contradicts what Al Gore and others have claimed about what these ice cores are telling us.

Here's the post again...

THE ACQUITTAL OF CARBON DIOXIDE
by Jeffrey A. Glassman, PhD

ABSTRACT:

"Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the product of oceanic respiration due to the well-known but under-appreciated solubility pump. Carbon dioxide rises out of warm ocean waters where it is added to the atmosphere. There it is mixed with residual and accidental CO2, and circulated, to be absorbed into the sink of the cold ocean waters. Next the thermohaline circulation carries the CO2-rich sea water deep into the ocean. A millennium later it appears at the surface in warm waters, saturated by lower pressure and higher temperature, to be exhausted back into the atmosphere. Throughout the past 420 millennia, comprising four interglacial periods, the Vostok record of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is imprinted with, and fully characterized by, the physics of the solubility of CO2 in water, along with the lag in the deep ocean circulation.

Notwithstanding that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, atmospheric carbon dioxide has neither caused nor amplified global temperature increases. Increased carbon dioxide has been an effect of global warming, not a cause. Technically, carbon dioxide is a lagging proxy for ocean temperatures. When global temperature, and along with it, ocean temperature rises, the physics of solubility causes atmospheric CO2 to increase.

If increases in carbon dioxide, or any other greenhouse gas, could have in turn raised global temperatures, the positive feedback would have been catastrophic. While the conditions for such a catastrophe were present in the Vostok record from natural causes, the runaway event did not occur. Carbon dioxide does not accumulate in the atmosphere."

http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/2006/10/co2_acquittal.html

_______________________________________________________________

The graph above represents temperature and CO2 levels over the past 400,000 years. It is the same exact data Al Gore and the rest of the man-made global warmers refer to. The blue line is temps, the red CO2 levels. The deep valleys represent 4 separate glaciation periods. Now look very carefully at this relationship between temps and CO2 levels and keep in mind that Gore claims this data is the 'proof' that CO2 has warmed the earth in the past. But does the graph indeed show this? Nope. In fact, rising CO2 levels all throughout this 400,000 year period actually lagged behind temperature increases ...by an average of 800 years! So it couldn't have been CO2 that got Earth out of these 4 past glaciations. Yet Gore dishonestly and continually claims otherwise.-ETL

_______________________________________________________________

"The above chart shows the range of global temperature through the last 500 million years. There is no statistical correlation between the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through the last 500 million years and the temperature record in this interval. In fact, one of the highest levels of carbon dioxide concentration occurred during a major ice age that occurred about 450 million years ago. Carbon dioxide concentrations at that time were about 15 times higher than at present.":
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010405M

_______________________________________________________________

So, greenhouse [effect] is all about carbon dioxide, right?

Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.

In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, 'Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,' Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).

The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other 'minor greenhouse gases.' As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2.

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

_______________________________________________________________

Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System

Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many 'facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold.

Water vapor is 99.999% of natural origin. Other atmospheric greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and miscellaneous other gases (CFC's, etc.), are also mostly of natural origin (except for the latter, which is mostly anthropogenic).

Human activites contribute slightly to greenhouse gas concentrations through farming, manufacturing, power generation, and transportation. However, these emissions are so dwarfed in comparison to emissions from natural sources we can do nothing about, that even the most costly efforts to limit human emissions would have a very small-- perhaps undetectable-- effect on global climate.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.