It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Former NASA Scientist: Global Warming is Nonsense

page: 12
34
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dorrell
What a load of rubbish! The fact that temperatures have barely risen in the last 20 - 30 years would dissuade them from continuing this nonsense.

I spent a few minutes and looked around for source data for Total Solar Irradiance and Global Temperature Mean to produce this:

Define "barely risen" for us.
edit on 13Mon, 05 May 2014 13:21:10 -0500America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago5 by Greven because: bbc put breaklines in for some reason on links




posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Anyone watch Cosmos last night? Great Episode. I haven't had the chance to watch most of them, just the first one and then the one last night.

Loved how he explained Global Warming. So simple and so good.

I also love, how people on this thread, will pick one thing, like Solar maximums or Ice ages and say. "How about that? This is why I disagree with Global warming." However, anyone that ever studies science, understands science and reads some of this stuff that's out there, will KNOW that climate scientists and other scientists like the host of Cosmos, take all of this other stuff into consideration and into their research and data. Don't you guys understand this? LOL

I also love how some of the people on this sight, who are probably burger flippers and retired shoe salesmen, think that they know more about the climate than people that have studied this topic their entire lives. That's really funny to me.



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Let me try and put a different spin on man made climate change...

it's simple really...

you don't # in your own backyard

that is all



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22


Love you! *applauds*



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 10:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: eManym
The global temperatures have been rising exponentially in the last 75 to 100 years. This is a cause for concern and is an indication of global warming.


do you understand what the term exponentially means? and if so; how do you explain that we are not broiling at about 10000 degrees or so by now? an exponential rise for 100 years ? seriously? actually for the last 17 years or so there has been no rise and by some papers there has been a decrease in temperatures during that time. and any rise that did occur in that 100 years certainly not exponential. words mean things and stuff like that. and what genius thinks that in the entire geological time frame of earth that 100 years is a significant sample? particularly when it has been much warmer in the geological past and the CO2 count has both been lower and higher with no real direct correlation to temperature.
edit on 11-5-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: more stuff



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 12:27 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

I've written this hundreds of times on here about the GW debate. We do not have enough data points to prove or disprove global warming, unless there is an exponential change and if that were the case then humanity better have colonized other planets and satellites if we wish not to go extinct. Climate change in some areas on this planet is real as a result of human development, the facts are clear.

The global warming debate is a distraction from bigger human caused problems currently happening.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Greven

This could be a reason?


The next time somebody tries to tell you that cow farts, cars or too many people are the impetus behind disastrous changes in the climatic norms of the planet, you may want to point them to a new analysis paper published in ‘Yale University’s Yale Environment 360 that unveils two of the actual causes of man-made climate change that the mainstream media refuses to talk about: genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and chemical-based, industrial agriculture.

The paper, entitled Soil as Carbon Storehouse: New Weapon in Climate Fight?, points to unsustainable agriculture — this includes the planting of millions of acres of land with GM soy and corn, and the regular spraying of this land with toxic pesticides and herbicides — as a major cause of excess carbon release. Healthy soils, it turns out, naturally sequester carbon and preserve it for the benefit of humans and the environment, but modern agricultural practices have destroyed much of it, creating a serious imbalance.’


Chemicals and GMO's cause the planet to warm?



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Dorrell
Strange. The cited article makes no mention of pesticides or GM crops. Nor does it say that current agricultural practices are contributing to global warming. What it does say is that soil has the potential to be used as a way to mitigate warming.

Not so strange I guess. Your source, naturalnews, is not known for getting the facts right.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:02 PM
link   
This topic always reminds me to what extent will global warming deniers and those who don't believe in science, as recently asked by Rubio will look like if nothing is done to slow our self-destruction...





edit on 15-5-2014 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 03:18 AM
link   
I love the logic of climate change deniers.


Thousands of peer reviewed articles supporting climate change: The science isn't in yet.

1 former NASA scientist says there is no man-made climate change: There you have it, definitely no climate change. Keep on raping the earth to feed your corporate masters.
edit on 16-5-2014 by dudeguyedp because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Talking to deniers is the same thing than talking to ET believers ( Any blurry photo is "PROOF" that alien are visiting Earth)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: dudeguyedp
I love the logic of climate change deniers.


Thousands of peer reviewed articles supporting climate change: The science isn't in yet.

1 former NASA scientist says there is no man-made climate change: There you have it, definitely no climate change. Keep on raping the earth to feed your corporate masters.


exactly!



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Dorrell
Strange. The cited article makes no mention of pesticides or GM crops. Nor does it say that current agricultural practices are contributing to global warming. What it does say is that soil has the potential to be used as a way to mitigate warming.

Not so strange I guess. Your source, naturalnews, is not known for getting the facts right.



www.tbp.org...

The above paper actually cites studies which demonstrate that though agricultural practices reduce co2 absorption they actually increase the reflection of inbound radiation and so the "big picture" aspect of that variable is still relatively murky.

It is under the section of Life and More on page 23.

The only agricultural impact that seems to have momentum is the oceanic dead zones being attributed to agricultural run-off which reduces the rate of co2 absorption by the ocean. That is of course if co2 has as great an impact as the scenarios indicate.

-FBB
edit on 16-5-2014 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: sputnik
Let me try and put a different spin on man made climate change...

it's simple really...

you don't # in your own backyard

that is all


ok you walk everywhere. and only wind sail crossing a ocean or lake.

wouldnt have advanced to this without fuel its a beautiful thing



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: blackcube
Talking to deniers is the same thing than talking to ET believers ( Any blurry photo is "PROOF" that alien are visiting Earth)


Oh the amazing irony of your criticism is . . . well, amazing!

The leads on the IPCC modeling specifically cite the blurriness of the modeling as needing further refining. The common criticism of the model not being able to predict recurrent weather (note : weather) patterns like El Nino, but then in turn are used to predict more "extreme" weather. They also miss cycles of tropical winds and rains which are major climatic events.

Hypocrisy is usually hilarious, laugh it off and go back to mocking everyone . . .

-FBB



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join