quote Originally posted by E.Furgal: you don't get it.. they say what is needed to get that next check/grant/donation.. they lie more than washington

I guess I don't but ROCK ON!!

quote Originally posted by E.Furgal: prove global warming.. todays record high was set in 1929 yesterdays 1972 july 4th 1909 if we are warming as they say.. those records should read.. 2010 2011 2011 not 40+ years ago their own facts disprove their crap

Admittedly individual daily records don't identify a trend, however, I keep seeing this pattern over and over. Old records still on the books.

If Global Warming is a reality, they should be all gone, but, they are not.

Arn

quote Originally posted by E.Furgal: prove global warming.. todays record high was set in 1929 yesterdays 1972 july 4th 1909 if we are warming as they say.. those records should read.. 2010 2011 2011 not 40+ years ago their own facts disprove their crap

report published a few months ago

2001-2010 warmest decade on record: World Meteorological Organisation

GENEVA: Climate change has accelerated in the past decade, the UN weather agency said Friday, releasing data showing that 2001 to 2010 was the warmest decade on record.

The 10-year period was also marked by extreme levels of rain or snowfall, leading to significant flooding on all continents, while droughts affected parts of East Africa and North America.

"The decade 2001-2010 was the warmest since records began in 1850, with global land and sea surface temperatures estimated at 0.46 degrees Celsius above the long term average of 14.0 degrees Celsius (57.2 degrees Fahrenheit)," said the World Meteorological Organisation.

Nine of the 10 years also counted among the 10 warmest on record, it added, noting that "climate change accelerated" during the first decade of the 21st century.

The trend continued in 2011, which was the warmest year on record despite La Nina -- a weather pattern which has a cooling effect.

'The average temperature in 2011 was 0.40 degrees Celsius above the long term average, said the WMO.

"This 2011 annual assessment confirms the findings of the previous WMO annual statements that climate change is happening now and is not some distant future threat," said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud. . . .

http://timesofindia.indiati...cleshow/12394358.cms

And in other news...at a time when thousands were desperately trying to escape East Berlin to the West, Lee Harvey Oswald defected to the Soviet Union....sooooo Socialism MUST work.

quote Originally posted by Arns85GT: Admittedly individual daily records don't identify a trend, however, I keep seeing this pattern over and over. Old records still on the books. If Global Warming is a reality, they should be all gone, but, they are not. Arn

If we are experiencing man caused warming, this is just the beginning. If it continues all records will be gone. The fact that all the records are not toppled in the BEGINNING of this climate change/global warming is to be expected. Time will tell.

quote Originally posted by TK: The next 10 years will be exciting!

Or the next 10 years will see your wallet more empty, due to all the taxes they want to levy, and you will get NOTHING in return for it.

quote Originally posted by E.Furgal: you don't get it.. they say what is needed to get that next check/grant/donation.. they lie more than washington

And the oil companies would never lie to protect their profits. It must be the scientists who are lying since the oil companies have absolutely no reason to lie or promote their product.

quote Originally posted by dratts: I don't get the connection. Are you still talking about global warming/climate change?

You haven't heard? It's a global money making scheme to siphon cash from the rich nations to the poor.

Of course the rich nations want to do this for some reason I haven't heard explained quite yet but I expect the conspiracy experts will regurgitate something soon.

[This message has been edited by newf (edited 07-30-2012).]

I don't know if global warming can increase co2. It will increase greenhouse gases though. When the perm frost melts it will release a crap load of methane which is a more potent green house gas than co2. That and when we lose the reflectivity of the ice caps could be the tipping point. (when it begins to feed on itself and there will be no stopping it).

quote Originally posted by Arns85GT: Let's not forget that plants eat CO2. Elevated CO2 causes increased plant growth, which in turn creates more Oxygen. It is all cyclical and relative. Mankind has been trying to control weather ever since the invention of the rain dance. It just can't be done. What we can do, however, is use prudent birth control for the masses. What scientists don't care to mention is the CO2 emitted by humans and animals. The more population the more CO2 That said, CO2 does not cause global warming. It is a result of global warming. (Remember we are exiting an ice age) Arn

quote Originally posted by newf: OK let's follow the money. Who has more the Oil industry or the research community?

Here is one set of numbers (as of 2009):

• The US Government has spent more than $79 billion of taxpayers’ money since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, administration, propaganda campaigns, foreign aid, and tax breaks. Most of this spending was unnecessary.
  
• Meanwhile, in a distracting sideshow, Exxon-Mobil Corp is repeatedly attacked for paying just $23 million to skeptics—less than a thousandth of what the US government spends on alarmists, and less than one five-thousandth of the value of carbon trading in 2008 alone.

I don't for a second think that anything I say will have an effect on your opinions, but I am curious do you ever read anything that doesn't support what you think? Do you have an open mind? Are you looking at both sides of the equation? I haven't made my mind up yet although I lean toward the warming theory.

quote Originally posted by dratts: I don't for a second think that anything I say will have an effect on your opinions, but I am curious do you ever read anything that doesn't support what you think? Do you have an open mind? Are you looking at both sides of the equation? I haven't made my mind up yet although I lean toward the warming theory.

Check his sources for a clue, they almost all have something in common.

quote Originally posted by dratts: I don't for a second think that anything I say will have an effect on your opinions, but I am curious do you ever read anything that doesn't support what you think? Do you have an open mind? Are you looking at both sides of the equation? I haven't made my mind up yet although I lean toward the warming theory.

Yes. Most of the skeptics arguments (and scientists' counter argument) are proven debunks of warmist's claims.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: The thing is, those feedbacks are NOT happening, and should have by now.

Like this one?
NASA Tracks Strange and Sudden Massive Ice Melt in Greenland
Sudden Greenland Massive Ice Melt


By: The Associated Press
Published: July 30, 2012
» Comments | Post a Comment

Nearly all of Greenland's massive ice sheet suddenly started melting a bit this month, a freak event that surprised scientists.

Even Greenland's coldest and highest place, Summit station, showed melting. Ice core records show that last happened in 1889 and occurs about once every 150 years.

Three satellites show what NASA calls unprecedented melting of the ice sheet that blankets the island, starting on July 8 and lasting four days. Most of the thick ice remains. While some ice usually melts during the summer, what was unusual was that the melting happened in a flash and over a widespread area.

"You literally had this wave of warm air wash over the Greenland ice sheet and melt it," NASA ice scientist Tom Wagner said last week.

The ice melt area went from 40 percent of the ice sheet to 97 percent in four days, according to NASA. Until now, the most extensive melt seen by satellites in the past three decades was about 55 percent.

Wagner said researchers don't know how much of Greenland's ice melted, but it seems to be freezing again.

"When we see melt in places that we haven't seen before, at least in a long period of time, it makes you sit up and ask what's happening?" NASA chief scientist Waleed Abdalati said. It's a big signal, the meaning of which we're going to sort out for years to come."

About the same time, a giant iceberg broke off from the Petermann Glacier in northern Greenland. And the National Snow and Ice Data Center on Tuesday announced that the area filled with Arctic sea ice continues near a record low.

Wagner and other scientists said because this Greenland-wide melting has happened before they can't yet determine if this is a natural rare event or one triggered by man-made global warming. But they do know that the edges of Greenland's ice sheets have already been thinning because of climate change.

Summer in Greenland has been freakishly warm so far. That's because of frequent high pressure systems that have parked over the island, bringing warm clear weather that melts ice and snow, explained University of Georgia climatologist Thomas Mote.

He and others say it's similar to the high pressure systems that have parked over the American Midwest bringing record-breaking warmth and drought.

Ohio State University ice scientist Jason Box, who returned Tuesday from a three-week visit, said he ditched his cold weather gear for the cotton pants that he normally dons in Nevada.

"It was sunny and warm and all the locals were talking about how sunny it was," Box said after getting off a plane. "Beyond T-shirt weather."


http://www2.wsav.com/weathe...-melt-gr-ar-4237607/

[This message has been edited by carnut122 (edited 07-30-2012).]

quote Originally posted by carnut122: Ice core records show that last happened in 1889 and occurs about once every 150 years.

So...WHY is this so alarming?

quote Originally posted by dratts: And the oil companies would never lie to protect their profits. It must be the scientists who are lying since the oil companies have absolutely no reason to lie or promote their product.

you might want to research before you eat crow.. they make .02$ a gallon profit.. thats 2 CENTS... the profit looks huge because of the shear VOLUME of oil we use..
the station owner, makes an avg of .05$ to .07$ per gallon depending on what grade sells..
dad and his brother owned two shells and mothers cousins had 3 getty's
they don't make tons of profits.. after paying the bills..
the core oil companies make a WHOPPING 2 CENTS a gallon.. I guess IN YOUR EYES thats to much for drilling, building, pumping, shipping, refining,and then shipping the final products to fuel depots.. oh and don't forget the wall street futures investors.. that run cude prices up anytime other blue chips are tanking..
all for 2 cents a gallon..
KEEP BEILEVE'N THOSE LIES.. oil companies are evil rich thugs..
what flavor kool aid you drinking today

[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 07-31-2012).]

quote Originally posted by E.Furgal: if global warming was anything but the farse it is I'd worry, but thats exactly what it is.. yes the climate is changing, and those that think we in the industrial age are the reason.. are either blind or fools. you can look up record highs for any day you choose.. funny thing is.. allot of those highs are from way way back.. before the industrial movement.. and most of the rest are 20-70 years old.. if the globe was warming as fast as the fear mongerers say, we should be breaking record highs every day or at lest within every 4 years.. not still have records from 40-70 years ago still standing.. but there is huge money in the humans are the cause of the warming.. as far as the "papers" linked above.. anyone can make and data "read" what they want it to.. I don't care if the whole science world ok's them.. show me any area that has had record highs records broken more than 50% of the time everyyear.. I'll even be nicer, fine one thats broke the records highs 25% of the time.. some areas are warming.. the bigger a city gets the warmer it gets.. walk on grass then pavement.. ,grass then aroof.. or a cerment building wall in the sun.. the warming is from that.. but to think that us humans are having a huge impack on the globes warmth is a fools game.. and IF the dyno's died and the ice age began because of a rock(s) hitting earth and putting dust in the air, blocking the suns rays.. it could be said that us. cleaning the dirty dust and other crap out of the cloud cover, is also warming the earth.. less cloud cover more rays reach earth.. but that works agains the fear mongerers global warming money ball. see I just made data, say what I wanted it to say.. just like science and their "papers"

This is a record summer for heat. Most of the recent records broken were from the mid 1800s. I guess it was using all those SUVs used in the civil war back then too... Its just the normal way the planet works. Live with it people. The planet will continue to have hot and cold periods for the next 4 billion years. The only thing really affecting anything is the sun. When it goes nova, we will have a problem.

solar flares.. are the cause of this years heat..
the sun dies.. we all f'd..

quote Originally posted by E.Furgal: solar flares.. are the cause of this years heat.. the sun dies.. we all f'd..

THE CURRENT SOLAR CYCLE IS DOWN
SO LESS FLARES AND SPOTS NOW THEN ''NORMAL''
SO NO IT IS NOT SOLAR FLARES

YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF OUR STAR IS AS BAD
AS YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF OIL CORP PROFITS

Sorry--what do oil corporations have to do with Global Warming again?

Do a search, right now, for "oil companies global warming".

"Oil companies" are energy companies. Look into the renewable energy projects of Exxon or BP.

They have funded scientists that have been skeptics of global warming, it's true. And?

quote Originally posted by dratts: And the oil companies would never lie to protect their profits. It must be the scientists who are lying since the oil companies have absolutely no reason to lie or promote their product.

Scientists don't have to lie, they only have to show the pertinent data that supports their research. They only have to show that their experiment has worked at least once to write and publish a paper which in turns provides a means for getting grant money.

As for the money side, I can tell you some of the top researchers are hardly living on the streets - take David Suzuki (Canadian 'climate' scientist), lives in a fairly 'nice' home (more than one for that matter). Funny part is that his 'Foundation' receives some of its funding from the Alberta oil sands (or as some people in the US likes to call it, dirty oil) - the evil doers on this planet.

But as to has more, well that would be oil, without doubt that it is way more profitable. Research is not cheap by any means and not necessary produce anything for several years where as it only takes them a few weeks to drill a hole in the ground to extract the oil and start making money.

Point here is that we as a society simply can not currently live without oil. Sure we can probably find alternate sources of power and maybe someday it would be cheaper than oil - trust me, we are working on it. BUT, what about all the other products that are produced from oil? Take all out plastics for one, just about everything we buy now has some plastic parts in it - could be a good thing as it may force manufacturers make things to last which would solve the garage issue, but would also increase the cost to the people and then there is the downside that a certain population would just die because they wouldn't be able to buy a new phone/iPad/etc every year.

[This message has been edited by Mickey_Moose (edited 07-31-2012).]

The weather we are experiencing is affected directly by the Sun. We have solar storms and flares and such that directly cause weather anomolies, like the big melt in Greenland.

Here is the latest fromspace weather

"INCOMING CME, WEAK IMPACT EXPECTED: A coronal mass ejection (CME) produced by Saturday's M6-class flare is heading toward Earth. According to analysts at the Goddard Space Weather Lab, the cloud could deliver a glancing blow to our planet's magnetic field on July 31st around 1500 UT (+/- 7 hours). "

You really have to follow the Sun activity to understand weather anomolies.

And let's not forget, 10 years ago Al Gore was telling us that Manhattan would be threatened by rising seas in less than 10 years' time He also predicted extreme hurricane activity. These things have not happened.

Does weather change? Yes. Is this a catastrophic weather change caused by mankind? No.

God controls it, not us.

Arn

quote Originally posted by Arns85GT: The weather we are experiencing is affected directly by the Sun. We have solar storms and flares and such that directly cause weather anomolies, like the big melt in Greenland. Here is the latest fromspace weather "INCOMING CME, WEAK IMPACT EXPECTED: A coronal mass ejection (CME) produced by Saturday's M6-class flare is heading toward Earth. According to analysts at the Goddard Space Weather Lab, the cloud could deliver a glancing blow to our planet's magnetic field on July 31st around 1500 UT (+/- 7 hours). " You really have to follow the Sun activity to understand weather anomolies. And let's not forget, 10 years ago Al Gore was telling us that Manhattan would be threatened by rising seas in less than 10 years' time He also predicted extreme hurricane activity. These things have not happened. Does weather change? Yes. Is this a catastrophic weather change caused by mankind? No. God controls it, not us. Arn

oh no.. ray b will say you don't know jack

I still havent heard what is so bad about global warming?

I agree 100% it IS happening. I can somewhat accept minor human impact. but - what I dont get is: whats the big deal?

it is not like the globe will uninhabitable. I dont even see it as becoming "uncomfortable". yes, currently arid region may get worse. but other areas will get better. I do think more areas will get better than areas that will get worse. so - it sounds like a good thing, doesnt it?

my only concern is the ice age which QUICKLY follows the global warming in the past 4 times this happened.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: So...WHY is this so alarming?

EXACTLY what I was going to quote. Their own statement says this is not a remarkable event. It happens routinely in their own words.

quote Originally posted by theBDub: Sorry--what do oil corporations have to do with Global Warming again? Do a search, right now, for "oil companies global warming". "Oil companies" are energy companies. Look into the renewable energy projects of Exxon or BP. They have funded scientists that have been skeptics of global warming, it's true. And?

The product they produce is a major cause of CO2, pollution and war, their profits are huge, they have caused environmental disasters, it's a finite resource, etc..

It's in their best interest to keep the world using oil for as long as possilbe as oil prices and profits skyrocket... and it helps their cause if they can pour millions into lobbying the governments (every party) and clouding the science of Climate Change as much as possible.

[This message has been edited by newf (edited 07-31-2012).]

quote Originally posted by Arns85GT: The weather we are experiencing is affected directly by the Sun. We have solar storms and flares and such that directly cause weather anomolies, like the big melt in Greenland. Here is the latest fromspace weather "INCOMING CME, WEAK IMPACT EXPECTED: A coronal mass ejection (CME) produced by Saturday's M6-class flare is heading toward Earth. According to analysts at the Goddard Space Weather Lab, the cloud could deliver a glancing blow to our planet's magnetic field on July 31st around 1500 UT (+/- 7 hours). " You really have to follow the Sun activity to understand weather anomolies. And let's not forget, 10 years ago Al Gore was telling us that Manhattan would be threatened by rising seas in less than 10 years' time He also predicted extreme hurricane activity. These things have not happened. Does weather change? Yes. Is this a catastrophic weather change caused by mankind? No. God controls it, not us. Arn

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT A WEAK IMPACT IS
10 TO THE -3 WATTS PER SQUARE METER
THATS 0.001 WATT OR NOT MUCH AT ALL
ESP IN THE CURRENT WEAK SOLAR CYCLE

BTW THERE IS NO GOD CONTROLLING ANYTHING
IT IS NUCLEAR PHYSICS ONLY NO GODS OR DEMONS

quote Originally posted by ray b: BTW THERE IS NO GOD CONTROLLING ANYTHING IT IS NUCLEAR PHYSICS ONLY NO GODS OR DEMONS

Nuclear Physics IS my God!

"INCOMING CME, WEAK IMPACT EXPECTED: A coronal mass ejection (CME) produced by Saturday's M6-class flare is heading toward Earth. According to analysts at the Goddard Space Weather Lab, the cloud could deliver a glancing blow to our planet's magnetic field on July 31st around 1500 UT (+/- 7 hours). "

...and I didnt see or hear about anything unusual happening. Maybe I missed it.

quote Originally posted by ray b: DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT A WEAK IMPACT IS 10 TO THE -3 WATTS PER SQUARE METER THATS 0.001 WATT OR NOT MUCH AT ALL ESP IN THE CURRENT WEAK SOLAR CYCLE

You ARE aware there is a lag of a few years between solar cycles and climate effect, right?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/...ming-global-cooling/

quote Originally posted by ray b: DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT A WEAK IMPACT IS 10 TO THE -3 WATTS PER SQUARE METER THATS 0.001 WATT OR NOT MUCH AT ALL ESP IN THE CURRENT WEAK SOLAR CYCLE BTW THERE IS NO GOD CONTROLLING ANYTHING IT IS NUCLEAR PHYSICS ONLY NO GODS OR DEMONS

Don't even know why I try.. So you're discounting El Nino, La Nina Cycles?, Volcano eruptions?
I know it doesn't fit your "view" but human impact is akin to a BB shooting against an M1. There are far larger forces at work affecting climate change.
MMGW research is nothing more than a money pit where "researchers" pin the tags "green" and "Climate Change" to anything they can to obtain more funding.

The Earth's weather is a very non-linear system with MANY states/parameters, it is quite likely that a good number of these are not fully known.
Even a for a well defined non-linear system, how would someone go about determining the trajectory of this system?
In order to accurately characterize the trajectory of a non-linear system it is necessary to know ALL the states of said system from the beginning.
Any missing data would most certainly make any predictions more like speculation.

For very short spans, it MAY be possible construct a linear approximation but that approximation would only be somewhat valid for that very short time span.

I am sure you have heard this question before, but I will repeat it: If the "scientistists" cannot accurately predict the weather next month, next week, tomorrow, or
even later today, how do you suppose they can make much broader and more ecompasng predictions?

All of you who truly believe in this man-made damage of the earth's atomsphere can put your money where your mouth is:

quit driving a car, quit using electricity, get a job close to home, and walk everywhere. get a very small home (not made from things that destroy the environment),
get rid of most of the crap you own. QUIT ADDING TO THE PROBLEM of global warming!

quote Originally posted by newf: The product they produce is a major cause of CO2, pollution and war, their profits are huge, they have caused environmental disasters, it's a finite resource, etc.. It's in their best interest to keep the world using oil for as long as possilbe as oil prices and profits skyrocket... and it helps their cause if they can pour millions into lobbying the governments (every party) and clouding the science of Climate Change as much as possible.

You have a choice to walk to work, or to go buy an electric vehicle. Why not buy a bike? You aren't strapped down by the oil companies to produce CO2 in the air. Oil companies don't do that themselves--you do. That's like saying it's the bar's fault you got drunk. War? I wasn't aware that oil companies were involved in war. If you are talking about government wanting control of oil, you aren't talking about companies. Their profits are huge? They earn less per dollar of sales than other industries. Where is the outrage for those industries?




They have caused environmental disasters that 1) had nothing to do with global warming and 2) were cleaned up... not to mention they were accidents, not on purpose.

Renewable energy isn't even close to where it needs to be. Do you trust Forbes? Big Oil (which I'm not a part of BTW), isn't negatively impacted by the global warming scare. Furthermore, both Shell and BP have openly discussed global warming being true. Exxon is researching alternative energy on a massive scale.

Oil companies aren't sitting around coming up with new lies to tell people.

Computer companies, like Apple, make over 20% profit, according to that chart. Where's the outrage over those obscene profits?

quote Originally posted by theBDub: You have a choice to walk to work, or to go buy an electric vehicle. Why not buy a bike? You aren't strapped down by the oil companies to produce CO2 in the air. Oil companies don't do that themselves--you do. That's like saying it's the bar's fault you got drunk. War? I wasn't aware that oil companies were involved in war. If you are talking about government wanting control of oil, you aren't talking about companies. Their profits are huge? They earn less per dollar of sales than other industries. Where is the outrage for those industries? They have caused environmental disasters that 1) had nothing to do with global warming and 2) were cleaned up... not to mention they were accidents, not on purpose. Renewable energy isn't even close to where it needs to be. Do you trust Forbes? Big Oil (which I'm not a part of BTW), isn't negatively impacted by the global warming scare. Furthermore, both Shell and BP have openly discussed global warming being true. Exxon is researching alternative energy on a massive scale. Oil companies aren't sitting around coming up with new lies to tell people.

Great graphs but instead of per dollar why not look at total revenue or profit? When you look at a salary do you look at how much per individual dollar you take home or do you look at the gross and net for the year? From what I see, total revenue wise. out of the top 8 companies in the world 6 are Oil and Gas. I never said they were inherently out to destroy the earth but I do think they have an awful lot of money, power and influence to keep their interests at the forefront and to delay/destroy competition to their product and have lots of cash to fund studies that cloud the science in their favour.

As I've said before I believe the what majority of scientists in the field of Climate Change are saying when it comes to that subject and the burning of fossil fuels is a major contributor to that and the demand is rising.

I think using oil is necessary right now but I also believe a switch should be made to clean(er) renewables for the near future and I think the technology is available to do that, but the will (political and otherwise) is not and I think the Oil companies are a major reason for that.