To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Well, such a finding will not sit well with the envirowackos. Thus, will be discounted as junk science.
2 posted on
09/16/2005 9:47:46 AM PDT by
RetiredArmy
(All democrats are ENEMIES of the Republic!)
To: All
Highlight.......
The conclusion many draw from papers such as these is that anthropogenic global warming from the burning of fossil fuels by humans is causing more lethal storms.
A closer look, though, reveals not human actions but rather natural cycles are the primary cause.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Al Gore, among other nutjobs, is deeply disappointed.
6 posted on
09/16/2005 10:19:57 AM PDT by
DustyMoment
(FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
anthropogenic?
"I'll take anthropogenic for $400, Alec."
"I'll give you $400 just for SAYING anthropogenic."
7 posted on
09/16/2005 10:21:40 AM PDT by
DustyMoment
(FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Global warming causes everything.
That really is the enviro belief.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Who are you going to believe? These Guys? or Robert Kennedy Jr.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Anyone remember the next ice age stuff, early 70's?
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Someone have an email address to send this to Robert Kennedy, Al Gore, Arianna Huffington??
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The sciences are complicated. So many studies are supposed to represent a final verdict one way or the other on global warming. One could read the article you just shared then say go to a web site that shows solar cyclic activities that provide the energy output increases during thirty some year cycles that can be used to claim some of the global warming readings of various types can be linked with solar activity. One can read reports such as listed at following site, to see where it can be shown that during the past 6000 years or so, there is evidence that it was warmer during the first half of the Holocene Climatic where surely mankind had little or no effect in increasing CO2 levels. http://www.co2science.org/scripts/Template/MainPage.jsp?Page=BrowseCatalogEnlarged&sProductCode=v8n37c2 Obviouse at this point, none of those that claim industrialized pollutents etc., that increase the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmostphere ever provide answers backed up with verifiable data/methods of study why we know the earth was warmer back when people named Greenland because it did not contain ice sheets, but was a fertile land. Obviously long before industrialization came to be.
12 posted on
09/16/2005 11:31:19 AM PDT by
Marine_Uncle
(Honor must be earned)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
This can't be true. I just read an article this morning by a knight ridder enviro journalist saying that Katrina is absolutely the work of global warming! :)
13 posted on
09/16/2005 11:32:32 AM PDT by
Hayzo
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Slashdot's linking here from their home page! Let's see how good Jim's servers and code are... I think it'll survive.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Sorry, looking at that data I can tell you it is not characterized by anything, it is noise. Pure noise, no signal, anything found an artifact. I've looked at lots and lots of scientific and statistical data of all kinds over years, and that is exactly what random noise looks like, when nothing is happening except sampling out of a noisy distribution.
22 posted on
09/20/2005 10:15:04 PM PDT by
JasonC
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson