Cursed Global Warming

Sorry, I can't resist this one anymore. You see that car there? The one stuck in the snow? Yeah, it must be that massive global warming we all keep hearing about. Maybe someone will finally figure out that the Earth does these things in cycles, and we're entering a solar minimum phase which is going to lead to colder temperatures over all.

Nobody disputes the climate is changing. There's even very little dispute that the over all climate is warming. What's very much in dispute is the claim that man is causing it.

The thing is, evidence is now mounting that we are no longer in a warming period. All signs are beginning to point to what's called a "grand solar minimum" which is what scientists say led to the Little Ice Age that killed a whole lot of folks in Europe about 400 years ago. A solar minimum of this type is described as starting off with a spike in warming temperatures, followed by an extended period of cold. Is it starting to make sense now? That spike in warming came in the late 1980s through the 1990s and then dropped off sharply after that once the 2000s rolled in.

Don't worry though. I'm sure Al Gore knows some people who know some people who know what to invest in to survive all this and will be starting up their Ice Age Industries company soon enough.
.........................
RIP United States of America

July 1776 - November 2012.

       
« NASA Finds .... Something?
Wikileaks and Cyberterrorism »

Posted on Dec 4, 2010 11:52 pm by Samson in: | 112 comment(s) [Closed]
Comments
Just couldn't resist opening the door to Fury & prettyfly, et al on this one, eh? Hadn't had enough from them (particularly Fury) over the last two years or so yet? :sigh: :headbang:

Well, I suppose if we really are entering a Little Ice Age like the one that killed so many in Europe 400 years or so ago, I better change my planned crop rotation schedule to include a bit more emphasis on hardier crops that can grow in colder weather seasons and less emphasis on spring/summer/fall crops, eh? :(
(Someone better tell the gods of Texas summer weather that we're expecting cooler weather year round for awhile here, because the last two summers here have remained above 100 degrees most of the summer. :rolleyes:)

Would it be trademark infringement if Al and his Ice Age Industries used characters from the Ice Age movie series by Pixar as their logo? ;) :P

       
Samson, didn't you describe this as torturous last time?

Oh well.

The planet is definitely not cooling down. Depending on which data set you prefer (GISS and NOAA vs Hadcru), 2010 is, globally either the warmest or equal warmest year on record, respectively. We are, to speak in cliche, 'still in the grip of a warming period'.

The abnormal cold that Europe and America is getting is not proof that Global Warming is not happening or proof of anything really, because its weather. Climate is when you take weather patterns over the period of a decade or more (you can break it up into years without a problem, but have to measure the trend over the years still) and look at the overall pattern. So you might be getting abnormal cold, but at the moment the rest of the world is getting abnormal heat that outweighs the cold.

Also, the very cold winter/ very warm summer is good evidence of a shifting climate, though obviously we aren't in debate about whether or not the climate is changing.

       
Except, of course, for how weather in North America and Europe has been trending cooler for the last 10 years. So yes, that does qualify as climate change. If it happens, that means it has to happen somehow, yes? So someone will be the lucky bunch who gets to sit around watching it happen. That's us, right here, right now. We're in the transition phase to a cooling trend caused by a grand solar minimum. To deny this, well, I dunno what that says about someone who denies it.

When everyone and his dog all over the world can see that what they're being fed by Al Gore and his cronies is bogus, even though 99.99% of us don't have climatology degrees, you'd think the remaining 0.01% would give up and just admit they have no clue what's going on. I mean come on, even on leftie sites like CNN and MSNBC, I see comments from people on AGW stories who are screaming that it's bogus, up to and including those who identify themselves as either meteorologists or climatologists.

The fact is, yes, the climate is experiencing a shift. The debate on that is mostly dead at this point. What's become the new debate is which side is going to get to collect the scam money from the policy changes it causes.

Also, you would think if Al Gore actually believed his pile of bullshit that he'd not be stupid and buy a mansion in Malibu. If you've spent the last 10 years telling people sea levels will rise and flood the coastline, it makes little to no sense to buy property that's going to get swallowed up by the Pacific Ocean if it actually happens.

       
I think its primarily because 99.99% of us don't have climatology degrees that we've been so easily led astray to believe that this sort of stuff is bogus.

Anyway, your claim that temperature trends have been negative during the last ten years stands at odds with all the information I've seen about the trends in that area, particularly with the escalating levels of Arctic meltage.

And what do you mean scam money; even after the transition, its going to be the same fossil fuel people who will be making the bucks of of energy production. No-one is pushing this forward with an agenda other than to ensure that the Earth remains capable of supporting human civilization for generation to come. There are plenty of people pushing against it however, that have very much rooted financial interests and would happily see the Earth ruined for future generations if it means profits for them now.

       
Scam money - aka the Chicago Climate Exchange. The "stock exchange" style system they set up to to carbon credits trading. A total scam. It was basically a "hurr durr I buy your air" thing. It was all based on AGW being true, and when Climategate broke, they all began abandoning ship eventually leading to the CCE having to close down because all the investors got out. The climate certainly didn't notice or care, America froze its nuts off that year just like its doing this year.

Nothing we do is going to matter. The Earth will continue to be able to support human life for the foreseeable future unless we blow ourselves to pieces with nukes. Plenty of climate scientists even say we'd be better off if the planet warmed up some more. More places to grow food. More food = larger population. The proof is in the history. We tend to do very badly when things freeze up.

A person does not need a fancy piece of paper saying they understand the climate to know things aren't happening the way they're being told. We're all capable of observing facts for ourselves. Some of us are just more willing to see the signs and speak up, and ironically that seems to be precisely because we haven't been brainwashed to toe the line.

So anyway, if the Earth warms, we might actually be better off for it. It's not the first time there's been no ice at the poles, and it won't be the last. There will also be another ice age, and there's nothing we can do about that when it comes either except die.

       
A warming earth isn't necessarily a good one for mankind. Firstly, ice melts so sea level rises and that means that all the good low lying farmland is lost. And that's a lot of farmland, which will offset any areas that are opened up for farming by rising temperatures. Also, there's the potential to shut down the Gulf Stream by diluting the Atlantic by melting enough ice. And then things will get very cold for the Northern Hemisphere.

Also, while its true that you don't need a piece of paper to understand the climate, the earth's climate processes are extraordinarily complicated. You can't just 'see the signs' and be able to speak with authority on the matter. Further more, you can't even trust the media to give accurate reporting on the science (that applies to information both for and against AWG). You're free of course to see conspiracy and lash out against it, but you can't flatly deny a consensus amongst climate scientists on the basis of what fox news has said or the fact that you've had colder winter than usual.

And will we be better of for a warmer earth? Considering the rampant climatic conditions that occur due to changes like these, the widespread changes to the environment, and the enormous restructuring of everything that society is and depends upon, I'd say that we're better off just trying to keep conditions the way they are right now rather than conducting a vast unregulated experiment with a climatic systems that we depend upon to survive.

       
Polar ice is already in the water, therefore melting it cannot cause displacement. In fact, simple experiments you can conduct at home show the opposite. When it melts completely, the water level actually drops slightly. Enough to be measured, but generally not enough to be an issue. With the climate scammers all saying the Arctic polar cap is already gone, you won't be seeing sea levels rise unless the Antarctic snow melts completely away, which is extremely unlikely.

Any measurements you find on the subject need to be strongly scrutinized. There's been a few articles I've run across (not recently) that have said that many of the sites where sea level rise is being measured are actually compromised by geologic subsidence instead. Ground sinks, sea level goes nowhere, but the instrument records it as a water rise. The instrument package in China for instance is very susceptible to this.

One must also be extremely suspect of any surface temperature readings being taken near urban areas. Sensors are often in place near structures or other man-made equipment that gives off waste heat, like air conditioners. Waste heat which in the over all scheme is countered by the atmosphere once it's risen away from the urban heat islands. Only satellite measurement of the higher layers means anything and those measurements have not recorded any sharp rises OR falls in the global temperatures, beyond a very slight 0.2 degrees C since satellite measurements began.

We can try and flail against this as hard as we want, but it's not really going to matter. We're at the mercy of what the solar cycle does. If the sun pops up next year covered in sunspots, we're probably going to suffer for it in the form of nasty summers. If it pops up looking like it does now, it'll get colder, sunspots are at an all time low right now. I can flatly deny a consensus if that consensus is wrong, and I've seen enough evidence to have decided that they are. I can't make them see reason though, so I have to wait for that to happen naturally.

Fortunately a lot of things in our lives aren't dependent on the whims of scientists with a financial incentive to keep reporting falsehoods as facts. If we had taken the same "consensus" stance with, say, slavery, we'd still be keeping slaves. After all, consensus was at the time that slavery was good for us. It wasn't until the Civil War that consensus turned the opposite direction. Consensus in the mid 1500s was that the Earth was the center of the solar system, or even the universe, and SCIENTISTS were the ones pushing this theory. Turns out they were wrong, and folks like Galileo risked being put to death proving them wrong. Although amusingly I did run past an article in which someone claims to have uncovered new evidence to suggest we ARE the center of the universe after all. Would certainly be interesting. Science once said the Earth was flat. Columbus anyone? Wait, he wasn't a scientist, how dare he question it!

BTW, during Christ's time on Earth, the climate was scorching us all silly. How many SUVs did we have then? How large was our carbon footprint then? How many fossil fuels were we burning for energy? Only those who have some financial gain to make from pushing AGW are still pushing it.

Also, trying to discredit my argument because Fox News honestly reports on it seems petty at best. Ironically even Julian Assange is on the same side since they went out of their way at Wikileaks to publish the Climategate emails citing that the world needed to know the truth. Back when Wikileaks was still a tool for good. So it's not just some twisted conspiracy by the oil companies or Fox News. It goes much farther than that.

       
AnImpatientFan [Anon] said:
Comment #8 Dec 5, 2010 3:57 am
I agree with prettyfly on this one.

       
Samson said:

Consensus in the mid 1500s was that the Earth was the center of the solar system, or even the universe, and SCIENTISTS were the ones pushing this theory. Turns out they were wrong, and folks like Galileo risked being put to death proving them wrong


No, it was the Catholic Church that was pushing that theory. Galileo was one of the few scientists (most of them were sniveling cowards at the time) that based his hypothises on evidence, rather than what was politically expedient. Granted, many 'scientists' get caught in the pitfalls of political expediency even today.

Prettyfly said:

Further more, you can't even trust the media to give accurate reporting on the science (that applies to information both for and against AWG). You're free of course to see conspiracy and lash out against it, but you can't flatly deny a consensus amongst climate scientists on the basis of what fox news has said or the fact that you've had colder winter than usual.


The evidence for climate change is not whether its warmer or cooler in any specific geographic region; what is evidence of climate change is relative volitity in weather patterns. If it was just cooler or warmer, that would mean the trade winds shifted (among other things); when it's record breaking heat on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, then record breaking cold on the weekend, with Tuesday and Thursday being within the seasonal norms for the season-then you have evidence of climate change. You don't have any evidence for causation; and you don't have any immediate way of fixing it.
And will we be better of for a warmer earth?

Nice rhetorical. Anyway, we pretty much know that humans have a limited range of tempuratures that are conducive to survival, and that tempuratures on either side of this range are a natural occurance; without any human involvement.
Samson said:

How many fossil fuels were we burning for energy?

Well, they did use bituman for things like torches.



       
Edited by Samson on Dec 5, 2010 11:28 am
Funny, because it was the established theory long before there even was a Catholic church. There's even evidence being uncovered now that the Geeeks and Romans both knew the Earth was round and that it wasn't even the center of the solar system, much less the universe. However the prevailing scientific view of the time was that the Earth was flat and the center of everything.

Ah, so it was all those torch burning bastards who did this to us! Down with torches!

       
Yes, the Greeks and the Romans both knew we live on a round rock, in a heliocentric solar system (although they didn't call it that); then the Judeo-Christian culture became predominant-and we began living on a flat planet that revolves around man-because the Bible says so. Part of Galileo's work was based on Greek science (like Archemides).

       
Polar ice is already in the water, therefore melting it cannot cause displacement. In fact, simple experiments you can conduct at home show the opposite. When it melts completely, the water level actually drops slightly. Enough to be measured, but generally not enough to be an issue. With the climate scammers all saying the Arctic polar cap is already gone, you won't be seeing sea levels rise unless the Antarctic snow melts completely away, which is extremely unlikely.


That would be true, except almost all of the ice caps (with the majority being at the south pole) are sitting on top of landmass, so they aren't just transforming content but actually adding to the water volume of the oceans. The Arctic ice cap obviously isn't already gone, and I don't think its supposed to for two more decades or so.


One must also be extremely suspect of any surface temperature readings being taken near urban areas. Sensors are often in place near structures or other man-made equipment that gives off waste heat, like air conditioners. Waste heat which in the over all scheme is countered by the atmosphere once it's risen away from the urban heat islands. Only satellite measurement of the higher layers means anything and those measurements have not recorded any sharp rises OR falls in the global temperatures, beyond a very slight 0.2 degrees C since satellite measurements began.


That's the urban heat island effect. Temperature graphs are already adjusted for it, and there is limited evidence of its impact as it is. Also, I was under the impression that the temperature fall in the higher layers (stratosphere) was far larger and to be expected if greenhouse gases were causing warming as it traps the heat in, preventing it from escaping back into the stratosphere and therefore cooling it.


BTW, during Christ's time on Earth, the climate was scorching us all silly. How many SUVs did we have then? How large was our carbon footprint then? How many fossil fuels were we burning for energy? Only those who have some financial gain to make from pushing AGW are still pushing it.


There is very little evidence that that was even the case locally at that point and certainly not globally. Down with torches! though because it sounds cool.

       
@Dallen: Funny, but I don't recall seeing anything in the Bible stating we live on a flat planet. Nor do I recall any Christian groups openly stating such a thing. Keep in mind, Catholicism isn't Christianity. They worship idols such as Mary and all those saints, something the Bible flatly says not to do (idolatry). They also believe in purgatory, which is never mentioned in the Bible. Nope. Catholicism is basically Roman paganism in disguise. You want someone to blame for their being a flat Earth theory, best go talk to some mummies, it was the Egyptians' daft idea.

@Prettyfly: There is no landmass of any sort at the North Pole. That's the entire reason I pointed out that melting it won't mean diddly. It's already floating, and as a result, that ice is causing displacement, which makes water rise not fall. As I said earlier, yes, I know there's a crapton of ice on the South Pole. I also said it would be highly unlikely for all of it to melt away and cause a rise in sea levels. There's also the often ignored fact that a great deal of that ice is locked up in the form of giant ice shelves that are floating on the water below, so a huge portion of the ice down there is also causing displacement. The net result is that if all the ice melts, sea levels won't rise significantly enough to do much beyond flood the coast.

The idea that it would intrude into the farmlands is absurd on its face because there's not enough water locked up in all the ice on the entire planet to raise sea levels by hundreds of feet. That's "Day After Tomorrow" kind of junk science right there. There won't be ocean front property in Phoenix, etc. And as I already pointed out, if the biggest proponents of AGW actually thought the consequences they talked about were real, they'd not place their own investments in harm's way by buying up so much coastal property.

There's also enough solid evidence out there regarding the urban heat island data to suggest that the over all temperature data is NOT taking it into effect. All you need to do is go look for it and not be so closed minded as to dismiss it as a lie.

If you think there's no evidence for a global warming period in Christ's time, my only conclusion is that you're dismissing the evidence of it without even considering it.

       
There's enough ice at the South Pole to raise the sea level 80 meters. Melting that would quite obviously take thousands of years. However, its easily possible to melt enough ice to get a 1-2 meter sea level rise this century, which would put a hell of a lot of good, low lying farmland underwater. Now, if the Earths populations rising and we're losing farmland then I see a very bad combination brewing there.

Luckily for Al Gore, he'll be dead by the time that the sea level rises enough to affect his sea front mansion.

       
Six feet is well within the margin for storm surge caused by hurricanes. I don't recall seeing much in the way of reports of hurricane storm surge inundating all this low lying coastal farmland you are suggesting exists. Nor do I recall hearing horrible stories of how storms in general pushing surge waves ashore have caused similar damage.

AGW supporters need to do a lot better than phantom arguments about how a 6 foot rise in sea water would doom our food supplies considering no farmer with a brain raises crops in coastal areas unless their entire island is only 6 feet above water to begin with. At that point I think I'd be looking for a new place to live and the reasoning wouldn't have much to do with the temperature going up 1 degree.

       
@ Samson

Daniel 2:35 said:

Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth


Only possible on a flat earth.

Isaiah 40:22 said:

It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

"He that sitteth upon the circle of the earth"
The earth is a flat disc that God looks down upon from his throne in heaven.


       
Or in a small valley with a limited view of their surroundings. Earth looks like a flat disc from high enough out into space. Neither of these passages outright calls it a flat plane/disc with edges you can fall off of. I suppose you think "the four corners of the Earth" means that people today think it's a flat rectangular shape?

Really, that whole thing with the Egyptians? I found that information in 30 seconds using Google. Anyone who claims Christians believe in a flat Earth has fallen for the Flat Earth Myth. The evidence is overwhelming that everyone accepted a spherical model of the planet from about the time of Plato onward and it was taught as an accepted fact from then on, even during the Dark Ages.

It appears as though the common belief of flat Earth in the Middle Ages was due to idiots who misinterpreted the two dimensional depictions of the planet and meaning it was flat. Either that or this is the greatest conspiracy known to mankind in all of history and they've been right all along.

       
Well no.

Modern christians (well 99.987% of them) know perfectly well what shape the earth is. Except places like the Westboro Baptist Church, and I wouldn't project any of their beliefs on anyone.

Yep, the Egyptians invented it-and Moses copied it.

Yes, your probably right.

       
Moses lived in ancient Egypt, it would hardly be surprising he'd agree with the scientific explanation of it at the time. Worth noting he couldn't have been a Christian either.

       
Granted, but then, we're not arguing about that, are we? What we're arguing about is what the church believed in the 14th century.

Yes, the rather suspicous transformation of the former roman emporer into the "vicar of christ" is...:thinking for a word: suspect.

       
Yes, and you can't make a case for the church arguing in favor of flat earth when its own priests and underlings were teaching people it was spherical.

       
WHAT?

       
There was "never" a case where the priests or "other clerical workers of the church" argued for anything 'other' than a flat earth.

       
No priest or "undrling" taught "anyone" (prior to 1937) that the earth was "anything other" than flat.

       
Oh boy. I didn't want to have to do this, but even wikipedia says you're wrong. DEAD wrong. A bit of digging through Google should lead you to even more interesting eye openers about the lies you've apparently been told.

The Bible never says the Earth is flat, only makes some vague figure of speech type references to things like "the ends of the Earth" or "the four corners of the Earth" which for all we know has been mistranslated 15 times before arriving in English.

       
<< prev 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 next >>
Comments Closed
Comments for this entry have been closed.
Anonymous
Register

Forgot Password?

SuMoTuWeThFrSa
 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31