Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Decade of 2000s was warmest ever, scientists say
AP on Yahoo ^ | 12/7/09 | Charles J. Hanley - ap

Posted on 12/07/2009 8:46:47 AM PST by NormsRevenge

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: Still Thinking; Red Badger

And the MAIN one you forgot: DON’T CHEW YOUR FINGER NAILS!

I have three Master Plumbers in my family! So, I know these rules quite well! LOL!


61 posted on 12/07/2009 9:57:21 AM PST by ExTxMarine (Hey Congress: Go Conservative or Go Home!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: The Antiyuppie
I never thought I’d see the day when I would trust a “scientist” about as much as I’d trust a politician.

I propose we change the word for "scientist" to "used scare dealer". It's more apropos and if you say it fast it sounds like "used car dealer" with whom they have more in common than what we picture as a "scientist".

62 posted on 12/07/2009 9:57:55 AM PST by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ExTxMarine

Oh, yah, that’s a biggie.


63 posted on 12/07/2009 9:58:23 AM PST by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
You also need to forget that CO2 acting as a “greenhouse gas” also violates the laws of physics.

CO2 clearly is a greenhouse gas. The magnitude and importance of the effect is what is in debate. CO2, by itself, in the concentrations resulting from human activity, are unlikely to have much effect. Alarmists, therefore, invoke positive feedback mechanism ("the snowball effect") that they claim will, or at least could, magnify the relatively benign effects of CO2 all by itself.

I think the effects of CO2, by itself, on balance are more likely to be beneficial than harmful. I could be wrong, by a lot. But so could the alarmists.

64 posted on 12/07/2009 9:58:52 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (The CRU needs adult supervision.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
So now they are using Starvin Marvin to scare us into submission. The warmers are truly criminally insane. They all need to be tarred and feathered an fed tho the polar bears.

AlGore is a real life Simon Bar Sinister.

65 posted on 12/07/2009 10:03:50 AM PST by mickey finn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ExTxMarine

EEEEWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!........That would go without saying..:^).......or even thinking!....................


66 posted on 12/07/2009 10:08:50 AM PST by Red Badger (Al Gore is the Bernie Madoff of environmentalism. He belongs in jail. - Unknown Blogger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Pure and total BS, as we now know. But the more control they lose, the more shrill they will become.
67 posted on 12/07/2009 10:14:56 AM PST by Major Matt Mason (A proud global warming denier.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: catman67

[[If the earth has been cooling for the past 10 years, how can it be the warmest decade?]]

theoretically, it can still be the warmest even htough cooling has been goign on- Lets say everage temps for 2000 years was around 80 degrees- then all of a sudden it shoots up to average of 99, then slowly drops over a decade to about 90- this would mean it’s the warmest period in 2000 years even htough htere is cooling going on for 10 yeasrs-

however, the past decade has NOT been the warmest- we were much much warmer a long time ago, and the emails of the CRU have proven that these criminals hid the evidence that PROVES that this past decade wasn’t the warmest- and as preciousliberty said, it’s been proven that the spots that they set their temp readers were PROVEN to be spots where it wqas artificially high temps

This hwole climate issue is just a massive fraud using slieght of hand tricks and smoke and mirrors, and yet world leaders are goign to force each and everyone of us to pay trillions of dollars to ‘fix ‘ somethign we are NOT to ‘blame’ for


68 posted on 12/07/2009 10:18:42 AM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

“CO2, by itself, in the concentrations resulting from human activity, are unlikely to have much effect.”

The greenhouse effect of manmade CO2 is about 0.28%. Most of the greenhouse effect (about 95%) is due to water vapor, of which almost ALL of it (99%+) is natural.

Of course that assumes we really know how the greenhouse effect works, of which there is some dispute.

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


69 posted on 12/07/2009 10:20:54 AM PST by 21twelve (Drive Reality out with a pitchfork if you want , it always comes back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
Come on now, did anyone actually expect them to say the 2000s WERE`NT the hottest decade in history?

Bush's fault. Women and children affected most.

70 posted on 12/07/2009 10:23:51 AM PST by a fool in paradise (Question authority!Who is the University of East Anglia to drive the 'Global Climate Change' agenda?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: depressed in 06

[[They cannot prove that it is currently as warm as the medieval warm period when they were growing grapes in Britain. Are they growing grapes in Britain? The medieval warm period was followed by the little ice age, which, didn’t end until the nineteenth century.]]

Exactly, the earth was cool- then warmign happend naturally, then peopel grew grapes in britain, then an ice age hit, and hte earth cooled, then it began warmign again after the little ice age ended, as one would htink the earth would do, and now wer’e cooling again as we’re goign back to ‘normal’ temperatures once again, and these criminal alarmists are saying it’s a ‘crisis’?


71 posted on 12/07/2009 10:23:51 AM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"Warmer still, scientists say, lies ahead."

Lies ahead, indeed. LOL!

72 posted on 12/07/2009 10:24:20 AM PST by LTCJ (The Constitution; first, last, always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anoldafvet
Law of Physics
73 posted on 12/07/2009 10:24:40 AM PST by Foolsgold ("We live in the greatest country in the world and I am going to change it" Barry O'boomarang 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Is that James Carville?


74 posted on 12/07/2009 10:26:43 AM PST by mesoman7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

I saw an episode of I Led 3 Lives from the early 1960s (about a US counterintelligence agent who infiltrated Soviet spy rings, based on a real agent).

The farmers were protesting the climate change that was causing a bad growing season and said it was caused by the US nuclear bomb testing. In the episode, it was motivated by Soviet agitators who wanted to pause US nuclear bomb testing while they caught up in development.

Communists have been claiming “green” socialism for longer than 20 years.

I’m not for dumping toxins in the river but I don’t believe that cow farts are killing the planet. Corn-gas isn’t saving the planet either.


75 posted on 12/07/2009 10:28:15 AM PST by a fool in paradise (Question authority!Who is the University of East Anglia to drive the 'Global Climate Change' agenda?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: mickey finn

They are Climategate deniers.

While they may have had an “excuse” for falling for the fraud because the data had been fabricated, this is a known issue now. Some still make excuses for the bad behavior of the core scientists of this fraud.


76 posted on 12/07/2009 10:30:46 AM PST by a fool in paradise (Question authority!Who is the University of East Anglia to drive the 'Global Climate Change' agenda?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

That’s about as comforting as the time I found myself 300 miles south of my wrong turn in Texas instead of entering New Mexico.

Although I finally ended up where I should have been, there was no way to get there short of retracing my steps.

The best thing is to enact this cockamamie Cap N’ Tax scheme and watch the funding disappear to the AGW folk who will no longer be needed.

Stock up on longjohns and sweaters and enjoy the ride.


77 posted on 12/07/2009 10:32:13 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, then writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MortMan
It was the warmest decade of the millennium (so far)! If this trend increases we are in for a very hot time indeed!
78 posted on 12/07/2009 10:32:17 AM PST by a fool in paradise (Question authority!Who is the University of East Anglia to drive the 'Global Climate Change' agenda?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: LTCJ

algore makes a photoshop cover for his new book, showing no Cuba and half of Florida gone, Arnold Schwarzenegger. The map, which demonstrates the devastating effects of global warming in just a century, shows how San Francisco Airport would be completely underwater if sea levels were to rise by 150cm (60in).....Both of these in the last 30 days


79 posted on 12/07/2009 10:40:20 AM PST by Foolsgold ("We live in the greatest country in the world and I am going to change it" Barry O'boomarang 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
I Led 3 Lives from the early 1960s .... Communists have been claiming “green” socialism for longer than 20 years.
I remember the show very well and although I can't disagree re: 20 years, the fall of the Soviet Union and Communism really accelerated the greenies' "membership" drive.
80 posted on 12/07/2009 10:41:49 AM PST by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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