The Last Ten Years of Global Warming Never happened

a reply to: Stormdancer777

Maybe one day you can post evidence that isn't a youtube video or a hack skeptic site. I have a feeling I will be waiting awhile.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Sunwolf
Global warming is a religion and Al Gore is it`s profit...err prophet!

....I'll get yer coat. (Shakes head)

Can someone splain to me, why is it everyone almost without exception trust not the government. From missing emails to war in the middle east. Fracking is bad, water is bad, food is bad, minimum is to low, big business buys big government, we no longer have a 4th amendment, the president talks a good game about transparency, and doing what's right does anyone trust the POTUS or the republican congress?

THEN WHY TRUST THEM OVER CLIMATE CHANGE??? Good god everything from 911 to sandy hook is a conspiracy but climate change you can take to the bank!

Consider this if you can't change America because of the constitution and the Electorate. Then why not change both?

Ignore 4th, 5th, 2nd, and soon the 1st. Nevermind the change, we won't enforce the laws unless thats what we want to enforce on a case by case basis to our benefit.

If you don't like the electorate just bring illegals, give them everything from citizenship to free food and place them in republican districts. Viola' Tilt the books in your favor.

Yeah look for a brighter future its headed our way. It's happening right in front of you.

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: nixie_nox

Dear Nixie_Nox,

I'm speaking sincerely here, I want your help. I don't think I've used the word "weather" when I meant say "climate," or vice versa. Please point out my error. i will apologize for any error made.

But to the broader question, "What is the difference between weather and climate?" NASA give us an answer:

The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods of time.

But how many months constitute a "relatively long period of time?" I would appreciate an answer to help me avoid any possible mistakes in confusing them.

With respect,
Charles1952

What a nice response, thank you.

You said "That sounds scientific enough, but the models have failed over 95% of the time in accurately predicting the temperature trends we have now. "

I interpreted that to mean the current temperatures that they give on a daily/weekly basis, unless you meant something else?


Here is a great video by my man.. Neil.

boingboing.net...

The description you gave is apt, but basically for use in a high school research paper.

To simplify it, consider weather to be what is happening on land, in your town, for today, and all the local attributes that affect it.

Climate, is a summation of all that weather over a long period of time, but includes all the attributes from the atmoshphere on out, including the Earth's orbit, rotation, relationship with the moon, etc.

Wow. I keep seeing all these posts about Al Gore and other talking heads.

I can understand if someone disagrees with me but I'm always talking about scientists and quoting scientists. We're talking about scientists and scientific research. To bring up Al Gore and those types of people is well...retarded. Debate with science. This is what this is about now. Not talking heads or news pundits.

originally posted by: amazing
Wow. I keep seeing all these posts about Al Gore and other talking heads.

I can understand if someone disagrees with me but I'm always talking about scientists and quoting scientists. We're talking about scientists and scientific research. To bring up Al Gore and those types of people is well...retarded. Debate with science. This is what this is about now. Not talking heads or news pundits.

Maybe because Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for climate change. Like it or not he is your self-appointed spokesperson.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Maybe because Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for climate change. Like it or not he is your self-appointed spokesperson.

And the Dahlibama won for Peace.

How is all that working out I wonder. Shows how much the tool bags over in Stockholm and Oslo know.

I have been following the global warming debate way before I came to ATS, at first I was taken in, but years of reading articles from both sides changed my mind.

This has nothing to do with my love of planet earth and that I believe we are caretakers.

I was just reading this , thought I would post it here.

www.pasthorizonspr.com...
“Unstable climate conditions favoured the evolution of the roots of human flexibility in our ancestors,” said Potts, curator of anthropology and director of the Human Origins Program at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History. “The narrative of human evolution that arises from our analyses stresses the importance of adaptability to changing environments, rather than adaptation to any one environment, in the early success of the genus Homo.”

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

So what drives the natural cycle?

originally posted by: nixie_nox
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Maybe one day you can post evidence that isn't a youtube video or a hack skeptic site. I have a feeling I will be waiting awhile.

Maybe one day the global warming advocates can provide some proof of 'global warming' instead of political hacks screaming the end is nigh.

Even better show proof that the US government has the power to police the world.

What are they gonna do ?

Create the 'green police', and go start bombing the hell out of polluters ?

And create prisons and throw 'eco terrorists' there.

Even better YET.

How the hell can our government 'save the planet' when they can't even control the southern border in this country?

a reply to: charles1952

Again, research is your friend. The ice age prediction from the 1970s was a prediction made by one crackpot scientist that the media globbed onto and ran with. It was never proven, nor supported by the scientific community.

If you look at the research at the time, most of it supported GW.

a reply to: MarlinGrace

You seem to be confused. The scientists are not governments. They are individuals who transcend national borders, and are worldwide in scope.

a reply to: neo96

Not to mention the U.S. government (and defense department) is the number one polluter(consumer) on planet earth.

For shame.

Maybe the answer isn't more taxes for the regular folk and pushing for lithium powered cars but rather just get rid of the U.S. army if they are that worried about the planet...which they are not.

originally posted by: OrphanApology
a reply to: nixie_nox

booksandjournals.brillonline.com...

and

www.independent.ie...

Gang dolphin rape, common mating practice in dolphin world.

Dolphins will very much sexually assault humans as well.

www.jstor.org...

They also kill their own young. They are in general violent, intelligent, horny and social creatures. That combination is not a good one.

Edit:

Also you can "educate" yourself and look up the same information I posted above. I also recommend doing google or Youtube search for "dolphin assaults humans".

The first link is the only valid one you provided, and it just goes over the mating aspects, nothing more, If anything, the journal just says they are promiscuous.

The second link is junk and the third has nothing to do with the topic. And I have already done research on this. Not to mention, my BFF worked with dolphins at the natural aquarium. So I have a nice little gathering of experts as friends.

Google the term “dolphin rape” and you’ll find countless references to male dolphins raping female dolphins, males raping other males, gang rape, and even dolphins raping humans. You might even find this hoax webpage claiming that dolphins regularly kidnap swimmers and take them to a “rape cave.” Head over to Google Scholar, however, and you will find exactly zero references to “dolphin rape” in the scientific peer-reviewed literature.

The reason for this discrepancy is quite simple: the term rape cannot be used to describe the kinds of behavior scientists have observed in dolphins. The central problem is that the legal definitions of rape include a lack of consent on the part of the victim, and we simply cannot know the extent to which dolphins or other animals are able to give consent. A non-consensual act like rape has “moral and legal implications” that are only relevant in the human world, which is why animal scientists (pretty much) stopped using the term altogether in the early 1980s. The correct scientific term to describe when a male aggressively restrains a female in order to mate is forced copulation. Forced copulation has been observed in ducks, lizards, monkeys, fruit flies, crickets, orangutans, chimpanzees, and countless other species.

But not dolphins.

linky

a reply to: guohua

*laughs* so we have gone from yahoo answers to FOAF stories. I will just ignore you from now on.

And skeptics constantly trotting out Al Gore are only desperate when you resort to using a movie maker from a decade old movie.

a reply to: OrphanApology

Not to mention the U.S. government (and defense department) is the number one polluter(consumer) on planet earth.

Actually no.

That 'honor' goes to China, and India.

a reply to: nixie_nox

That's just an author's opinion on the use of the term "rape" in regard to mating habits of animal species. Also your anecdotal evidence of a friend who works with dolphins does not equal research in regard to whether dolphins have violent sexual behaviors.

Also, if a dolphin forces his mating habits on me, I am calling it rape because that is what it is to me.

The second article is not junk and if you want to read up more on the professor who co authored the research his name is Richard Connor and is a professor at the UMass Dartmouth.

Since you have zero research skills and just call stuff "junk" without providing any reasons WHY that is...here is a link for your viewing pleasure.

www.monkeymiadolphins.org...

All the publications to fulfill anyone's desire to understand dolphin aggression. It requires reading though...so....

This will be my last response to you.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth


Hack sites that state everything that businesses want to be true so skeptics like you buy it, is not a good arguement. GW won't do anything to us!

If it sounds to good to be true, than it is.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: MarlinGrace

You seem to be confused. The scientists are not governments. They are individuals who transcend national borders, and are worldwide in scope.

Not confused at all the government funds scientist, and has proposed a huge tax plan to fight Global Warming/Climate Change. We make up a small fraction of the world population but are the ones asked to make the sacrifices, based on government funded climate change. Would there still be research if the government didn't fund it? Not a single government prediction, not a single scientist prediction, not a single loud mouth leftie prediction has come true. Scientist can't agree, and the all mighty Al Gore the biggest hypocrite on the planet is the spokesman. Na not confused at all.

a reply to: neo96

As a government the U.S. consumes more energy.

I am not talking about the countries as a whole. China wins on that one as a whole...they also have a lot of #ing people. Same with India. Per capita I believe smaller countries are the worst. For larger countries the U.S. still has the highest per capita rate of CO2 emissions(indicator of energy usage). U.S. is 18 tonnes per capita compared to China's 6.

docs.google.com...

originally posted by: MarlinGrace


Not confused at all the government funds scientist, and has proposed a huge tax plan to fight Global Warming/Climate Change.

Definitely confused. Not all scientists are funded by governMENTS, plural emphasis.

We make up a small fraction of the world population but are the ones asked to make the sacrifices, based on government funded climate change. Would there still be research if the government didn't fund it?

This lie keeps being propagated, I wonder why this is? It seems you're a bit centered on the US, but in reality, the developed countries around the world have various policies and groups working within the context of the climate catastrophe which is unfolding. Definitely not about the US, although seeing as we disproportionately use more energy than any other country, and like to be thought of as exceptional leaders, we should perhaps do just that on this one.

Not a single government prediction, not a single scientist prediction, not a single loud mouth leftie prediction has come true. Scientist can't agree, and the all mighty Al Gore the biggest hypocrite on the planet is the spokesman. Na not confused at all.

Well, that's certainly false, but you can keep to your irrational absolutes. Not as if I'm going to change your mind. No leftie here, I'm just a guy. Sheesh!


Funding of Scientists