Posted on 06/04/2014 5:38:52 AM PDT by rktman
So, I find myself sitting around a patio table next Independence Day sipping on the perfect mimosa with some friends and a couple of folks I haven’t met before. One of the new acquaintances brings up the subject of “climate change.” I know from the term used that this one is probably a sorta believer but not a hard-core, unshakable advocate; were that so, he would have used the latest, hippest, most with-it name-change term “climate disruption.” Now it’s time for my Favorite Global Warmism Question #1:
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Earth’s orbital anomalies, silly!
Even though their own propaganda shows the fallacy of their beliefs, they still believe.
{They aren't smart enough to decipher the graph”
I asked my global warming friend, “What is the difference between a 67 degree earth and a 69 degree earth? What is the exact temp that the earth SHOULD be?”
I ask them to explain how Greenland was once warmer; hence its name, and it cooled down way before the industrial age.
Or how the “experts” went from predicting an ice age in the seventies to a warming disaster in such a short period of time (did not using aerosol deodorant really do that much?).
and a computer/internet so he can write this drivel...
The Japanese and German’s used bombs and bullets in WWII in a failed attempt to defeat the United States. Today,The purpose of Global Warming, Climate Change, Climate Disruption is nothing more than a political tool being used to destroy the American economy. It’s brilliant and wildly successful. Who can be against being “Sustainable”?
1st qtr, 2014 U.S. economic growth was at .01% or less indicating that the economic goal of “Sustainable Development/Agenda 21” as adopted by the U.S. has largely been met. This also fulfills the machiavellian wish of Maurice Strong, UN Chairman of UNCED aka The Rio Earth Summit where in 1992 he articulated the intentions of the “Plan for the 21st Century- Sustainable Development/Agenda 21” by saying this in regard to our “unsustainable” high consumption of natural resources which is, according to them destroying the Earth; “...isn’t it our responsibility to bring about the collapse of the industrialized countries?” Now, to become truly as “Sustainable” as perhaps Bangladesh, more vital work is quickly needed to further collapse and “Degrow” the economy. This will be accomplished with draconian restrictions on business and energy use which will be mandated by arbitrary regulations spawned from the bogus hype to save the planet from the dread effects of antropogenic Global Warming aka Climate Change aka Climate Disruption.
http://blogs.worldwatch.org/sustainableprosperity/resources/clubfordegrowth/
I use a slight corollary of this… According to all kinds of data including IPCC data, it has been shown that there has been no warming for almost 20 years but regardless, I don’t raise that card right away. My usual response to someone raising the prospect that the planet is warming is “how do you actually know that and can you provide an uncertainty analysis for that conclusion?”
CO2 2005=379ppm=0.000379=ca 4/100,000
Common core math
QUESTION #3: Why isn’t the ocean not now flooding the lobbies of seaside resorts?
Yes, exactly. One or two hours, or one or two days is tolerable, but try weeks on end... Idiots, all of them are idiots.
I often ask if someone can point me to a long term climate change study that has accurately predicted weather patterns out 20-30 years. So far, no body has been able to produce one.
They think they are using science to debate social policy when it isn’t science at all. In real science there is a hypothesis, gathering of data, an evaluation of the data to see if the evidence supports the hypothesis and then reproduction of the results.
What the warmists do is come up with a theory, gather evidence and then create computer models based on the evidence that support their initial theories. At no point do they ever go back and see if the real world results match the predictions of the computer models.
Exactly. I ask them why there used to be camels and other large mammals in the arctic. You can look at any child’s basic dinosaur book and learn that the climate was very warm in places that are now frozen.
I think conservatives need to be careful not to dismiss climate change as a whole though. It is a real natural occurring event throughout the history of the planet. What we need to emphasize is that mankind cannot possibly do anything to affect it in any meaningful way. It’s like worrying about the sun burning out. It will happen, but it is a useless. The serenity prayer comes to mind. Climate changes is so gradual, people will naturally adapt- move, build new homes and eventually cities in cooler, safer areas, adapt to warmer areas....I just don’t understand the urgency on this.
I rather like the term “greenhouse effect”, because it makes for a delightful thought model.
To start with, imagine the surface of the Moon. It has no greenhouse effect, because it has no atmosphere at all. So if something is in the shade, it very quickly becomes extremely cold. If it is in sunlight, it very quickly becomes extremely hot.
Now compare this with a physical greenhouse. It is quite humid inside, typically, and when it is cold outside, it tends to be warmer, somewhat. Importantly, when it is hot outside, the high humidity inside the greenhouse actually moderates the temperature somewhat.
In a nutshell, the greenhouse effect *moderates* extremes of temperature.
So all the hysteria about the Earth entering a new ice age, or broiling, is rather silly.
“What is the “correct” temperature for earth and how do you know?”
My question usually is, “what is the mitigation plan if the scientists who you place your trust in overcool the earth, creating an ice age which will kill millions of people?”
Also, what if Global Warming leads to more arable land to grow food?
Change it to Chicago and those are the same questions I have asked my Obamabot neighbor from northern IL. He threw out the 97% crap, so I explained where that number came from. He then just sighed and said he wishes somebody could read a thermometer. Oh and that all the anti AGW data is unreliable because the Koch brothers paid for it.
But in the movie he adjusted that to show just the opposite.
Did you ever read Lucifer's Hammer?
So — they can’t read?
That figures.
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.