Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ChessExpert

Maybe their theory is wrong.


6 posted on 03/29/2013 5:44:44 PM PDT by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: catnipman

Heretic! Denier!


7 posted on 03/29/2013 6:09:48 PM PDT by Trod Upon (Every penny given to film and TV media companies goes right into enemy coffers. Starve them out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: catnipman

I think you nailed it on the head.

The term Faustian is used three times in the article, a little heavy-handed IMO.

I found this interesting:

“Hansen argues that the impact of human carbon dioxide emissions has been masked by the sharp increase in coal use, primarily in China and India.”

Increased coal use is usually presented as increasing, not decreasing coal use. So the warmists should make up their minds. Does increased coal use warm the environment? Or cool the environment? China, India are waiting with bated breath to hear the answer. Also, Obama might want to stop his war on coal-fired powerplants if they actually combat global warming. Closing these powerplants will hurt the economy and might, according to Hansen, warm the environment.

In the mid 70s there was concern about global cooling. For an example, you can do a search on “The Cooling World” to find an article from Newsweek. (Also, a search on “James Hansen Global Cooling” turns up some hits.) There had been 30 years of cooling and the environmentalists/socialists demanded that the government take action.

They thought the cooling might have been due to particles emitted by mankind. Which brings us to the next paragraph:

“Increased particulate and nitrogen pollution has worked in the opposite direction of rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.”

The warmists have never, to my knowledge, addressed why global cooling ended, and why global warming began. Did we reduce our emissions of particles, thereby stopping cooling and starting warming? Perhaps government policy, advocated by environmentalists, caused global warming. Surely, that was not their intent, but that may be what happened.


14 posted on 03/29/2013 6:48:32 PM PDT by ChessExpert (The unemployment rate was 4.5% when Democrats took control of Congress in 2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: catnipman

Nah, nothing to do with any theory — it is intentional liberal deception for political reasons.

And the rest of the gullible world swallows it to appear compassionate and understanding.


22 posted on 03/29/2013 7:15:14 PM PDT by 353FMG ( I do not indicate whether I am serious or sarcastic -- I respect FReepers too much.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: catnipman
Maybe their theory is wrong.

My theory is governments around the world want an excuse for more taxes and regulations, so they'll fund anybody who promotes catastrophic man made global warming.

25 posted on 03/29/2013 7:50:54 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson