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.

 

The Last Ten Years of Global Warming Never happened

page: 7
42
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: guohua
This has to be evidence enough all by it's self to prove, they much have some Funny Science Ti Hide Again!
If G W was a Fact and Known To Be A Fact Why Deny Other Scientist a Platform to Explain Their Views From?
That's Easy, They don't want both sides to be heard for fear of People Actually, using their own Brains and doing some Critical Thinking and Not Just Being, Sheep and Shear'd Bold & Penniless by Taxes.



What taxes?




BBC journalists are being schooled in how to cover science.

A progress report from an independent body, the BBC Trust, says Britain’s public broadcasting service shouldn’t be giving equal air time to climate change deniers and others on the scientific fringe.

The report found the BBC remains prone to “over-rigid application of editorial guidelines on impartiality” that resulted in the news service giving “undue attention to marginal opinion.” The author of the report, Steve Jones, emeritus professor of Genetics at University College London, cited the existence of manmade climate change as an example.

BBC Wash Post


And the problem is? I have personally been affected by what happens when journalists misinterpret or misconstrue information to be falsely provided to the public. Journalists are not scientists so therefore, they bungle the information they receive.




The levels of Antarctic sea-ice last week hit an all-time high – confounding climate change computer models which say it should be in decline.
America’s National Snow And Ice Data Center, which is funded by Nasa, revealed that ice around the southern continent covers about 16million sq km, more than 2.1 million more than is usual for the time of year.
It is by far the highest level since satellite observations on which the figures depend began in 1979.
In statistical terms, the extent of the ice cover is hugely significant.


I have already covered this. Antarctic has different kinds of ice, and should not be gaining any ice since it is the world's driest desert. It only proves GW.

This is what happens when you don't use actual scientific research and listen to a journalist, as I previously explained.

BTW, the Artic melting and the Antarctic gaining ice is because of GW.





It seems counter intuitive, but that growth is a result of the glacial melt happening on the rest of the continent, Carleton said. As fresh water melts into the ocean it decreases the salinity of the seawater, he explained. Water with less salt content freezes at a higher temperature, so even with warming air temperatures melting the glaciers, the Antarctic Ocean continues to gain sea ice.


The land ice is melting and then refreezing as sea water ice.

the ice paradox




posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace

That doesn't tell me anything. "Over the past 20 years, the federal government has spent billions of dollars to address climate change. Coordination and planning are critical to effective and efficient efforts."

No mention of what agencies and what grants to what scientists you keep referring too.

If you are going to accuse highly educated persons of being paid off by the government, you should at least have more data, don't you think?



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: OrphanApology

Translation: My silly skeptical points were easily debunked, so I resort to calling people trolls since I don't have any real evidence to submit.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: OrphanApology
a reply to: MarlinGrace

It's a loop...doing laps in a kiddie pool with the water running.
Can I use that kiddy pool with the water running? That is so true. lol

Also here is a good link to government funded research layout since you gave link.

fas.org...

Wow that is very detailed mine was just an overview of the billions, thanks. The thing I take issue with these guys is, the misinformation they quote and it's never challenged, then someone leaning and looking for the truth is misdirected. It can make me nuts. Sometimes I wonder if they aren't funded by the same money as your report. We know the government has no issue with paying for protesters from the Travon Martin case why should these yoyo's matter when it comes to funding.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

What drives the natural cycle?



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: nixie_nox
a reply to: OrphanApology

Translation: My silly skeptical points were easily debunked, so I resort to calling people trolls since I don't have any real evidence to submit.



Again read it and weep... Source You can read right? I am sure this won't be enough either. Fantasy has a way of changing the truth.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace

Funny, the only people who seem to be well funded are the skeptics.

The only paid shills are you people.




Conservative billionaires used a secretive funding route to channel nearly $120m (£77m) to more than 100 groups casting doubt about the science behind climate change, the Guardian has learned.





The millions were routed through two trusts, Donors Trust and the Donors Capital Fund, operating out of a generic town house in the northern Virginia suburbs of Washington DC. Donors Capital caters to those making donations of $1m or more.


secret funding



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace

Go ahead.

Yeah I have no idea. They could just be teenagers arguing on the internet for arguments sake but it gets irritating at times.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:22 PM
link   


I have read that Antarctica is experiencing a net loss of ice each year when factoring in Glacier loss so how does sea ice compensate for that?

a reply to: Grimpachi
I have to admit I'm not sure but I know what I've read and I'll tell you what that was.
With sea ice. We hear a great deal about the decline in Arctic sea ice.
But why are environmentalists and scientists not discussing the long-term increase in the southern hemisphere of ice?
I under stand that across the globe, there are about one million square kilometers more sea ice than, let's say, 35 years ago, which is when satellite measurements began, I think, That's what I read.
So it's fair to say that this has been something of an embarrassment for climate Changer's Don't You think?

Not Only Did The Ice Not All Melt Away and the sea's and Ocean's Did Not Rise, We're still on Dry Ground and the Polar Bears and Penguins are breeding and living full and Happy Lives.
That's my take on the whole sea ice rising, but I'm not the resident genius, She / He should be along shortly to call me a Flat Earthier or Stupid Skeptic and then you can make up your on mind as long as it's His / Her Way Of Thinking.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: OrphanApology
a reply to: MarlinGrace

About so many posts in realized I was providing legitimate sources the other side wasn't reading. Also no actual research articles from other end yet automatic "you're wrong nuh uh".

It's a loop...doing laps in a kiddie pool with the water running.

Also here is a good link to government funded research layout since you gave link.

fas.org...


that happens a lot, I am betting they didn't watch the video.

probably because the post hit before they could have.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace

Stop wasting time by posting links to the fact the feds give agencies money. No shocker there. Stop with the circular, time wasting argument.

What AGENCIES are FUNDING what SCIENTISTS for WHAT global warming GRANTS.

Yes the feds have money, I already know that.


edit on 7-7-2014 by nixie_nox because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Videos are not evidence.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: OrphanApology

Again you have added nothing to the discussion but put the blame on other people for the fact that you don't have any real information to provide that isn't off your skeptic websites, which are no better than creationist sites.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: nixie_nox
a reply to: neo96

What drives the natural cycle?



All the hot air coming from the global warming crowd.

Second verse.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Magellan's circumnavigation of the globe unequivocally disproved the flat-Earth theory, but there were people who clung to that old farce for decades.

Considering the animus seen in GW believers, many will never concede.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
Magellan's circumnavigation of the globe unequivocally disproved the flat-Earth theory, but there were people who clung to that old farce for decades.

Considering the animus seen in GW believers, many will never concede.


Funny.

Beats those who still think man is the center of the universe.

That the global warming crowd so boldly declares.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: nixie_nox
a reply to: MarlinGrace

Stop wasting time by posting links to the fact the feds give agencies money. No shocker there. Stop with the circular, time wasting argument.

What AGENCIES are FUNDING what SCIENTISTS for WHAT global warming GRANTS.

Yes the feds have money, I already know that.



Apparently you refuse to read the PDF, this is a government breakdown of every penny the government has spent on global warming, based on systems, departments, contractors, and companies. If you refuse this information I have a great idea, prove to me everyone they are not funding because I can prove where 140 billion dollars goes towards climate change funding. What can you prove?

Promise me you can read this is a lot of work...



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: nixie_nox
Are you purposely ignoring the vast pro-CAGW funding going on in the US and elsewhere?


Funny, the only people who seem to be well funded are the skeptics.

The only paid shills are you people.


Are you unaware that media sources such as the BBC and others have decided to deny skeptics any attention?

I don't believe you are ignorant; you just sublimate the facts to support your ideology.

Ever hear of Tom Steyer, and his $300 million pro-AGW campaign this year??
The UN, EPA, DoE and other private sources funding alarmist agendas and dogma?

deny ignorance
jw



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace

'The debate is over' !

'The science is settled' !

Two things real scientists will never say.

Because real scientists NEVER STOP collecting data, etc.



posted on Jul, 7 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Well, one thing is easily discernible regardless of what side you take:

We're indefinitely divided on this subject, here in this thread, and in general in society within the US.

What may not be realized, is that the rest of the world looks at us like fools, because the science is very clear to them.

Only in the US is this debated with seemingly equal voice on both sides.

Everyone else is clued in.

Tragic how far behind we are on this one.

I heard in chat recently we've got more lawyers per capita than any other country.

Guess we've got the most propagandists as well.


edit on 7-7-2014 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
42
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join