Skip to comments.
Lorne Gunter: Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof
National Post ^
| October 20, 2008
| Lorne Gunter
Posted on 10/20/2008 9:54:52 AM PDT by managusta
In early September, I began noticing a string of news stories about scientists rejecting the orthodoxy on global warming. Actually, it was more like a string of guest columns and long letters to the editor since it is hard for skeptical scientists to get published in the cabal of climate journals now controlled by the Great Sanhedrin of the environmental movement.
"An analytical chemist who works in spectroscopy and atmospheric sensing, Michael J. Myers of Hilton Head, S. C., declared, "Man-made global warming is junk science," explaining that worldwide manmade CO2 emission each year "equals about 0.0168% of the atmosphere's CO2 concentration ... This results in a 0.00064% increase in the absorption of the sun's radiation. This is an insignificantly small number."
(Excerpt) Read more at network.nationalpost.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News
KEYWORDS: 2008; catastrophism; elnino; globalcooling; globalwarming; lanina; lornegunter
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
The money quote is the final sentence of the report.
"It may be that more global warming doubters are surfacing because there just isn't any global warming."
Therefore I could not beat the response by " osaycanuc"
"Can't you just hear the hot air whooshing out of this balloon? PHSSSSSSSSST! To wit, the lack of comments here, where one might normally expect to see a torrent - nay a geyser! - of piqued opinion as to the relative science around either side.
Checkmate, anti-capitalist, anti-consumerist, anti-carbon buffoons. Your bandwagon is running out gas!"
1
posted on
10/20/2008 9:54:53 AM PDT
by
managusta
To: managusta
Globally, volcanoes put out far more CO2 annually than does industry and motor vehicles. I don't see anyone suggesting we outlaw volcanoes.
2
posted on
10/20/2008 10:03:33 AM PDT
by
scooter2
(A taxpayer voting for Barack Obama is like a chicken voting for Col. Sanders.)
To: managusta; xcamel
3
posted on
10/20/2008 10:05:34 AM PDT
by
NonValueAdded
(don't worry, they only want to take water out of the other guy's side of the bucket.)
To: scooter2
Oh, just give the lefty moonbats a little more time. They'll get around to some sort of scheme to control volcanoes (think really big stack scrubbers). And really big fans imbedded into the mountains East of LA to blow the smog away, too, while they're at it. (Yes, I recall that episode of the Beverly Hillbillies, long ago).
4
posted on
10/20/2008 10:06:53 AM PDT
by
SAJ
To: managusta; Killing Time; Beowulf; Mr. Peabody; RW_Whacko; honolulugal; SideoutFred; Ole Okie; ...
5
posted on
10/20/2008 10:10:22 AM PDT
by
xcamel
(Conservatives start smart, and get rich, liberals start rich, and get stupid.)
To: scooter2
When volcanoes are outlawed, only outlaws will...
never mind.
6
posted on
10/20/2008 10:11:46 AM PDT
by
astyanax
(If you need to wear a mask while speaking your mind, it is probably best you remain silent...)
To: managusta
Facts don't matter. It is ideology driving a desire to seize control politically and economically. The lefty policy changes will do far more damage than any imagined "anthropogenic CO2".
7
posted on
10/20/2008 10:13:54 AM PDT
by
Myrddin
To: managusta
Your bandwagon is running out gas! Obama's going to give us a free windmills for our band wagon, so there! Nya!
(/sarcasm off)
Find later self ping.
8
posted on
10/20/2008 10:16:36 AM PDT
by
listenhillary
(Should we turn Alaska or Texas into our Galt's Gulch?)
To: managusta; xcamel; GMMAC; Clive; exg; kanawa; backhoe; -YYZ-; Former Proud Canadian; Squawk 8888; ..
Thanks for the ping, Xcamel.
9
posted on
10/20/2008 10:18:40 AM PDT
by
fanfan
(SCC:Canadians have constitutional protection to all opinions, as long as they are based on the facts)
To: xcamel
10
posted on
10/20/2008 10:38:39 AM PDT
by
alwaysconservative
(First, we lost our freedom of speech. . .)
To: managusta
Does not matter, government will implement “green” solutions at any cost for the next few years then take the credit.
11
posted on
10/20/2008 10:39:35 AM PDT
by
edcoil
To: managusta
I think with the downturn in the economy, frankly we just can’t afford to have a global warming catastrophe, so we won’t.
12
posted on
10/20/2008 10:54:53 AM PDT
by
B4Ranch
(I'd rather have a VP that can gut a Moose, than a President that wants to gut our Second Amendment!)
To: managusta
The evidence we have is that our planet goes through hotter and colder periods lasting for decades and centuries, e.g. the medieval climate optimum, little ice age and, further back, the late Holocene climate optimum or hypsothermal. The conceptual problem some have despite the evidence involves the received notion that stars are thermonuclear engines. IF that were the case, there would be no reason to expect solar activity to increase or decrease periodically and thus cause planetary weather changes.
Stars are not thermonuclear engines; They are plasma-physics phenomena. They're basically similar to lightning rods i.e. focal points of cosmic discharge. As they pass through regions of space with greater or lesser electrical potential from themselves, they heat up or cool off.
To: B4Ranch
Oddly enough, that’s exactly what the Europeans are now saying.
Funny how that works, eh?
14
posted on
10/20/2008 11:09:36 AM PDT
by
NVDave
To: varmintman
Stars:
As they pass through regions of space with greater or lesser electrical potential from themselves, they heat up or cool off. First time I've heard of this.
Got any links which discuss this phenomenon?
15
posted on
10/20/2008 11:14:30 AM PDT
by
Max in Utah
(A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.)
To: Myrddin; All
While interesting, I seem to remember reading the satellite data can be deceiving and not give an accurate picture compared to actual ground readings.
Still, the point that there is no doubt a cyclic nature to cold and warm periods is true.
There most certainly is a cycle, and we are due for a cold period. Whether all the warm period has been due to that cycle or even most of it, however, could be hard to tell.
16
posted on
10/20/2008 11:19:55 AM PDT
by
rwfromkansas
("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
To: managusta
Gore could be freezing to death and he'd still be yelling about “global warming”.
Could liberals as narrow minded and rigid as they seem?
17
posted on
10/20/2008 11:25:16 AM PDT
by
GOPJ
(Mail acorns to t;he MSM starting October 21. Reporters: ACORN addresses are in phone book.)
To: rwfromkansas
Some of the satellite data is inaccurate due to failure to account for orbital decay.
18
posted on
10/20/2008 11:50:24 AM PDT
by
Myrddin
To: Max in Utah
>Got any links which discuss this phenomenon?
www.thunderbolts.info
http://www.plasmacosmology.net/
http://www.holoscience.com
www.kronia.com
http://www.plasma-universe.com
www.cosmologystatement.org
Google searches on 'plasma cosmology' will produce more if that isn't enough.
To: managusta
I notice a subtle shift of concern from Global Warming to Climate Change. This allows Al Gore to sound the alarm no matter what the weather does.
20
posted on
10/20/2008 11:57:16 AM PDT
by
NorCalGuy
(Everybody complains about the weather but nobody does anything about it)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 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