Posted on 01/28/2014 8:23:56 AM PST by CedarDave
It’s really hot outside, so global warming must be a real say Algore, Hansen, Mann, Reid, Pelosi, and Obama.
VERY GOOD! Let me repeat that for you.
“I am such a denier. We all know when we need ice cubes, we put a cup of water in the microwave...”
I agree Eugene, live in a tent and drive a bike. You go first.
The weird thing is that CO2 really is going up, but the graph shows it is pretty much linear, meaning nothing we have done in the past 15 years has done anything to change the rate of C02 growth.
If the GWAlarmists were correct that the C02 buildup was our fault, then we should have at least seen a change in the rate as we took steps to curtail our energy use.
The graph looks like there is some other cause of C02 increases. And the temperature graph suggests that the C02 increases are not contributing to higher temperatures.
Which is where he contradicts himself. If the weather is getting more 'extreme' (hotter hots, colder colds), then, the AVERAGE stays exactly the same.
to prevent this calamity by reducing emissions
The major causes of manmade 'local warming' are heat production and heat sinks. Large cities have a heat shell and they affect the local weather. Asphalt parking lots, and highways absorb heat and the few foot or vertical area where we spend most of our time, a tad warmer. However, no politician or 'scientist' wishing a grant would ever suggest removing highways, parking lots, and high rise office buildings.
Deforestation causes changes in the local weather. Even so, the changes don't amount to much. Not on a global scale.
The 'climate' has changed all over the world, since the beginning of the planet. The Sahara Desert wasn't always a desert. North America was well covered with miles of ice.
A CLOUD can change the temperature of a 20 square mile area by tens of degrees in minutes. A forest fire can do the exact opposite. What does man have that can prevent or counter either one of those things ?
Fact is, mankind cannot generate enough C02 to make any significant change in the 'weather' or 'climate'. Neither can he reduce C02 enough to make any difference.
Let’s see... I’ll just plug in the thirtieth variable and I’ll have it. There. Voila!
Ships being trapped in record setting ice in Antarctica, doesn't mean anything, except that it is summer in Antarctica.
Exactly! Imagine how much more productive Canada, Siberia and Northern plains of America will be. They are also are much closer to water than the farmlands of California and rely on less irrigation.
He's a regular on MSNBC and on Al Sharptom's show. Show a little respect here /sarc
One gram of Carbon Dioxide heated at the surface by incident sunlight carries (2 * 539 = 1078) 1078 times less energy into the atmosphere than one gram of water.
Carbon dioxide represents 0.0387 % of the atmosphere. Water in the lower atmosphere represents 1% to 4% or 25 to 100 times the amount of carbon dioxide.
Combining the two statements above, Water is (25 * 1078 = 27,175) to (100 * 1078 = 108,700) times more responsible for greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide.
"Obamaholes"! I love it!
They don't seem to get laughed off the stage, so they keep repeating this absurd nonsense to the applause of the journolist group and their stupid green followers. I'm not certain tar and feathers is good enough for the lot of them.......
I have an idea for a new law: A law where saying this kind of stupid crap forces them to help shovel my driveway. Daily.
:-)
so true! A toddler has a singular interest - ME! Sounds just like your standard elitist (which also describes liberal RATs).
Man caused global warming driven by CO2 was a theory that subsequent scientific observations have challenged. In true science when the theory no longer fits what is being observed the theory is either rethought or discarded as wrong. The whole idea that any theory is set in stone and not subject to any further inquiry regardless of its widespread acceptance (the consensus of scientists BS) is NOT science, but dogma. This is exactly what happened during the time of Galileo when the church ruled that Aristole's explanation of how the sun stars and planets revolved around a stationary earth was settled science and no further inquiry was needed as this theory fit neatly into accepted church dogma. To say or think otherwise was heresy and would bring anyone who denied this dogma before the Inquisition. A few brave souls like Galileo used scientific observation to test this dogma. Galileo was astounded when what he saw in his telescope and observed by careful measurement totally contradicted Aristotle's accepted model. Of course Galileo was labeled a denier i.e. a heretic and was forced by the Inquisition to recant his work under pain of death. Today the climate change Inquisition enforces orthodoxy by smearing any deniers, cutting them off from further research and generally bullying them into silence or submission.
ALL scientific theories are subject to further scrutiny. That is true scientific inquiry. To say that the case on global warming is closed and no further scientific inquiry is needed is utter rubbish.
“....Global Warming is destroying the planet, and maybe even the entire galaxy.”
.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaggggghhhhhh!!! Little puny planet Earth is destroying the Milky Way!!!!
So would I, but that would not show the warming needed to keep getting grant money.
Thank you. Reading Eugene Robinson's writing is like sniffing vomit.
Go ahead, call me a denier. It doesn't hurt my feelings or my intelligence.
My train/VW analogy fits perfectly.
The global warming scammers forget about large amounts of ice forming in the south pole when they tell us about a slight loss of ice in the north pole.
Sometimes they will tell us about the “Extreme warming” in the southern hemisphere during winter in America to make us shocked and concerned. It is summer down there when it's winter up here. Apparently they don’t quite grasp that even when it’s cold in one part of the world, it can be hot in another.
“Deniers who claim there has been a 15-year “pause” in global warming are cherry-picking the data to fit a pre-cooked conclusion... “ Using actual facts over a fifteen year period showing that the effects are the OPPOSITE of what the scammers say does not count as “cherry-picking”.
Why is it getting warmer? There’s still just one explanation that fits the available facts:
It's not.
It's getting colder. Maybe the author should’ve read the last sentence that they wrote:
“there has been a 15-year “pause” in global warming”
I guess that if it ever actually gets warmer for 15 years, we can claim that it is a “pause” in the cooling.
What a bunch of Marxist, non-scientific, government supremacist nonsense.
The word that comes to mind is Machiavellian.
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.