Posted on 03/13/2006 3:53:09 PM PST by blam
The sun is warming up so in a few years we will all look like a bunch of Puerto-Ricans anyway. I like that tan:)
Any day now the watermelons will be calling for us to nuke China and India so as to stop global warming.
I'm sure of it.
Bush's Beans!
I read an interesting article some years ago. It claimed that 5 billion dollars a year of tree plantings would take care of any excess co2 produced by the US. I asked a liberal friend why, if he was so concerned about co2 & "global warming", why he and the rest of the sky is falling libs didn't push that solution. He hummed and hawed, so I answered my question for him. If it doesn't involve bigger government and greater restrictions on freedom and property rights, it's not a good solution.
He was strangely silent.
My thoughts exactly.
It was noted in the article that in '05, CO2 rose by 2.5 PPM..
Well, all those signatories to Kyoto have been working very hard to reduce CO2 emmissions, haven't they?
If they are doing what they are clamoring for the world ( meaning the USA ) to do, then those levels should have lowered or at the very least, levelled off..
But they haven't..
Which shows that Kyoto is having "zero" effect on CO2 levels..
I also question the accuracy of their measurements of ancient CO2 levels..
I doubt they have an accurate estimation and are off by orders of magnitude..
In other words, they don't know what they are talking about, and have no idea what is causing the planet's climate to act as it does..
But they will not shut up until they get their grant money..
To believe in global warming you have to believe the following:
1. That the earth’s temperatures regions were stable, and never changed due to natural causes.
2. That an ice age 16,000 years ago, was not natural, so that warming since then is not natural.
3. That over 20 glacial advances and retreats have occurred during the last 2 million years, were not naturally caused.
4. That the earth is dead. The oceans, rain forest, volcanoes, plant growth, or clouds have no effect on the environment.
5. Mankind in all omnipotent. Only we effect the environment. A few of us with aerosol cans will create Ozone holes, and global warming. An exploding volcano that spews more chemical is the air in one belch than mankind has done in its total existence has no affect on the atmosphere.
6. Only western cultures have any effect on the environment. Anything out of China, or a third world country is natural or has no effect.
7. That people have no memories about all the doom and gloom predictions that NEVER even came close to being a fact.
8. That raising the average temperature of the worlds artic Poles from, -60 to -40 will melt ice.
9. That raising temperatures is a bad thing, and has no benefit to any animal or plant. If temperatures rise and we use less oil to heat our home, or that Florida organs will never be ruined do to frost bite, are all bad things.
10. That mankind has more power over global temperatures than the Sun does.
11. That if you take all of the worlds green house gases and represent them by a column 1 mile high, mankind’s contribution is 3/8 of an inch. This contribution will raise global temperatures like urinating in the Ocean will raise the water level.
Those who proclaim Man Made Global warming are FRAUDS, SNAKE OIL SALESMEN. .
And, he has a point - every system that I have ever studied has exhibited structural variance - what he calls "tipping points."
But - I want to see what historic even his climate model is validated against....
(...............crickets...............)
...or I must conclude that he is simply parroting his dopey religious cult.
Man-O-Man is that ever the TRUTH!!!
excellent summary - but you need to add, "And if you give me a lot of money, I can further refine the problem..."
(Explitive Deleted!!!) Just wait till the new 11 year sun-spot cycle gets in high gear!!! You'll be able to talk round the world on an un-amplified CB radio and the ejecta will really light up the northern sky at night and yes... The Earth will get slightly warmer no matter what man does, or doesn't do.
These dummies need to quit being so danged conceited! They remain me of horny ants, lying on their backs, naked on rafts yelling "raise the draw bridge!" Man plans and God laughs!!!
The measurements are accurate enough. Pre-industrial measurements of co2 levels correlate with ice cores too. Measurements have been made throughout the period and indicate co2 concentration is increasing.
In the name of accuracy I feel compelled to point out that just about none of your statements is true
Not my point..
I'm not questioning the accuracy of the measurements..
I'm questioning the validity of Kyoto
I'm questioning the committment of those that signed the accords..
I'm questioning the entire agenda, which appears to be 90% anti-america and 10% environmentalism..
Did you know that John Kerry was in Vietnam?
It's actually a pretty simple method that has been around over a hundred years and is still used today in gas analysis using an Orsat analyzer. Carbon Dioxide is readily absorbed by potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide...using a graduated burette you can calculate it quite accurately.
If you are an evolutionist, I don't see a problem here. Our bodies should just "evolve" to run on CO2 instead of O2. What is the big deal? Or...is the evolutionist afraid that he might be one of the transition fossils that doesn't make it and is never found anyway?--but....we all know they are there. yeeeesh!
I strongy disagree...back in 313,231 BC...things got kinda hot and sharp rise in C02 for 8 years. I know this because i went back in my time-machine and personally verified it with a C02 tester I bought at Radio Shack. Gus (manager at the Pulaski Radio Shack) gave me precise details on how to operate the tester...and I got it on discount for $35. After I entered my time machine...I spent 15 minutes at 313231 BC...had a beer while the tester verified the conditions. That was then, and now is now...and Bush is the reason we have this issue.
If only we had elected Ross Periot back in the 90's...things would have been different. I've been contemplating a time-machine trip back to Periot's run and get registered in 3 or 4 different states....to pump the guy's chance of winning.
OK.. I see what you're referring to..
Note the word ancient..
I'm sure they have measured CO2 in glacial ice, oceanic sediment, etc. and determined the amounts found in their samples..
But they then make extrapolations from those findings and come to some sort of estimate based on their measurements..
When you're talking 65 million years ago, I'm not sure they have all the data necessary to make such broad assumptions about what the CO2 levels were back then..
Or what they should be today..
I just don't think they have all the facts and are making some wild assumptions about climatology that support their claim of global warming being caused by human activity..
Ah my appologies I totally missed the word ancient
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.