Skip to comments.
So Who Is Right in Debate on Role of Global Warming?
NY Times ^
| 9/24/05
| Andrew C. Revkin
Posted on 09/23/2005 11:23:51 PM PDT by Crackingham
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 next last
To: pepsionice
I doubt if any of those guys ever took a class in history or understand the implications of history.
Gone from the curriculum, along with Logic and Basic Science. Last Spring, when all the pine trees were blooming, my part of Wisconsin declared a *moderate air emergency*. Mostly, this was for the cities and mostly it was caused by an inversion that lasted just a few days during pollen season. A woman who teaches science to eighth graders was just beside herself, wondering why schools and all business were not canceled, since we were all at such risk. She never questioned that she had gone to work and then driven another eight miles out to my house. I mentioned pine pollen, showed her some photos that were being published from Alaska and other places of huge green pollen clouds descending on towns, mentioned why the Smokies are called smoky. She was amazed, stunned and uncomfortable, because it simply *had* to be automobiles and electric plants, etc. She made no distiction between urban and rural areas.
Forty years of agenda-driven education and media resulted in everyone who wanted to feel good about themselves planting acres of pine trees under government programs that give tax breaks for re-foresting former pastures/fields. We are encouraged in the same way to not log.
But trees are good. Technology is bad.
21
posted on
09/24/2005 2:12:20 AM PDT
by
reformedliberal
(Bless our troops and pray for our nation.)
To: pepsionice
Global warming could not have started that early, because Clinton was president since then.
"Scientific" analysis can prove "global warming" began at noon, 1-20-2001, Eastern time.
22
posted on
09/24/2005 3:33:12 AM PDT
by
tdscpa
To: A message
NYT -- your paper is a disgrace... A DISGRACE to journalism. Perhaps "Jurinalism" is the better word?
23
posted on
09/24/2005 3:37:43 AM PDT
by
N. Theknow
(Kennedys - Can't drive, can't fly, can't ski, can't skipper a boat - But they know what's best.)
To: Jeff Chandler
I reckon about 3% of the earths atmosphere is CO2, and only about 2% of that is generated from human sources.
I make that 0.06% of earth atmosphere.
If man made CO2 increases by 10% a year, that would increase the total CO2 as % of earth atmosphere by 0.006% each year.
Talk about vanishingly small numbers.
To: Crackingham
METEOROLOGIST SAYS HURRICANE CYCLE IS NORMAL... Because hurricanes form over warm ocean water, it is easy to assume that the recent rise in their number and ferocity is because of global warming.
But that is not the case, scientists say.
talkshowamerica
At a time when some are theorizing that global warming may be the reason for more intense hurricane seasons, climatologists say the AMO is the real culprit.
... "The effect of global warming was at most second order," he wrote, "and probably not present at all."
sptimes.com
Of course liberals will hang their hats on this one:
Study: Global Warming Making Hurricanes Stronger
By Associated Press
...The analysis by climatologist Kerry Emanuel bla ...bla ...bla ...
livescience.com
What's really interesting is what Kerry Emanuel has to say on his own web page:
Q: I gather from this last discussion that it would be absurd to attribute the Katrina disaster to global warming? A: Yes, it would be absurd.
wind.mit.edu
25
posted on
09/24/2005 4:08:52 AM PDT
by
StACase
To: plenipotentiary
Dang,I was hoping a little more C02 would green up my lawn a little. looks like I'll still be adding nitrogen in the spring...
To: Crackingham
Total rubbish.
To: Crackingham
After all, one of the clearest signals that human actions have pushed recent warming beyond natural cycles is a measured buildup of heat in the world's oceans, and oceanic heat is the fuel that powers hurricanes.What a dunce! Was it a clear signal the other times this happened? Nightfall.
28
posted on
09/24/2005 4:23:56 AM PDT
by
jimfree
(Freep and Ye shall find.)
To: Crackingham
I personally believe that hurricanes are changing their tactics and are no longer causing random disaster but are seeking areas and industries where humans are causing global warming and purposely going there to destroy them.
29
posted on
09/24/2005 4:24:32 AM PDT
by
aardvark1
(Eschew obfuscation.)
To: Crackingham
Absolute total NONSENSE. Article posted on Sunspots this week explains it. "Global Warming" as a man made phenomenon is complete hysteric hogwash pushed for totalitarian Socialist political agenda NOT from any basis in science.
30
posted on
09/24/2005 4:28:09 AM PDT
by
MNJohnnie
("Don't get stuck on stupid, reporters.")
To: plenipotentiary
Your off by a few decimal places.
The Earth's atmosphere is a thin layer of gases that surrounds the Earth. Its composed of 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 0.9% argon, 0.03% carbon dioxide, and trace amounts of other gases.
From: http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/astronomy/planets/earth/Atmosphere.shtml
But your point is even more apparent. 0.03% = 0.0003 or 3 parts out of 10,000..
And it's probably changed from 0.000297 to 0.0003 because of man.
31
posted on
09/24/2005 4:31:42 AM PDT
by
revtown
To: revtown
Oops...
But then whats a few decimal places to your average climate scientist.
Thanks for pointing that out.
To: Crackingham
The NY Times' "scientists" are ignorant.
1) The hurricane activity cycle spans a period that is greater than "several decades". Looking for a trend within a portion of one period of a cycle is bad math/science.
2) Measuring a build-up of heat in the earth's oceans does not automatically mean human actions are responsible.
3) Politicians' opinions have nothing to do with the cause and effect of the earth's warming/cooling cycles.
4) Attributing warming to humans because they "cannot think of anything else" is the funniest theory that the NY Times could have said.
Here is a clue for the "scientists" at the NY Times. When an oven is set to 350° and the actual temperature climbs to 400°, do not blame the casserole: Check the thermostat and the HEATING ELEMENT.
If the planet is warming up, let's look at the SUN first. (Then we can talk about the insulation...)
33
posted on
09/24/2005 4:44:47 AM PDT
by
TaxRelief
(Protest discrimination against real scientists at the MSM!)
To: Congressman Billybob
NPR was saying the hurricane weather pattern cycles are more like 50-60 years, FWIW.
34
posted on
09/24/2005 4:48:52 AM PDT
by
TaxRelief
(Protest discrimination against real scientists at the MSM!)
To: aardvark1
I personally believe that hurricanes are changing their tactics and are no longer causing random disaster but are seeking areas and industries where humans are causing global warming and purposely going there to destroy them.ROFLOL. You owe me a computer screen!
35
posted on
09/24/2005 4:52:25 AM PDT
by
TaxRelief
(Protest discrimination against real scientists at the MSM!)
To: Jeff Chandler
When you see "leading experts" read experts with government grants to prove global warming. Clinton handed out grants to people who would determine the results of his predetermined opinion.
36
posted on
09/24/2005 5:03:16 AM PDT
by
paguch
To: doug from upland
Even he had to admit that SUVs were not causing that.
You never know what they're putting into those UFO's nowadays though.
37
posted on
09/24/2005 5:04:18 AM PDT
by
moog
To: A message
evidence that Mars is warming, and Earth is warming and other planets are warming, then the cause is .... maybe the Sun.
It's actually the fire and brimstone that are expanding.
38
posted on
09/24/2005 5:06:37 AM PDT
by
moog
To: aardvark1
I personally believe that hurricanes are changing their tactics and are no longer causing random disaster but are seeking areas and industries where humans are causing global warming and purposely going there to destroy them.
I think that Osama gets around in portable tornados myself.
One of my friend's favorite websites is infowars.com.
39
posted on
09/24/2005 5:09:40 AM PDT
by
moog
To: calrighty
..........they want to keep their phony junk science do nothing jobs.You forgot that most of those jobs are at taxpayers' expense.
40
posted on
09/24/2005 5:12:57 AM PDT
by
Erik Latranyi
(9-11 is your Peace Dividend)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson