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.

 

"Global Warming", Ha Ha, tell me another good joke!

page: 5
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

2012 was one of the 10 warmest years on record globally (from the NOAA web site)


Warm temperature trends continue near Earth’s surface: Four major independent datasets show 2012 was among the 10 warmest years on record, ranking either 8th or 9th, depending upon the dataset used. The United States and Argentina had their warmest year on record.
www.noaanews.noaa.gov...




posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


When I calculate my mileage I ignore the 10ths of both miles and gallons. I get 25.6 miles to a gallon on average. It's a good average that is very consistent. Every time I fill up my car.

26 miles to the gallon. Why?
The output of a mathematical operation can’t have more significant digits than the smallest number of significant digits in any of the inputs.
It's the same reasoning that you use without thinking, you would not repeat that you got 25.63233324 miles per gallon, you know thats way too many significant digits.

I'm sure there's a valid reason that the temperature datasets are given to a greater precision than the original dataset, I just have yet to find it. Two decimal accuracy from instruments that were likely readable to 1/10 of a degree is puzzling.



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven


So you purposely ask a question that has basically no answer that I know of, then when I tell you to do the research yourself there's nothing to see?

I'm unable to find the answer to that question as well, thats why I asked here. Neither you nor I can find an answer to the question of How many climate models are there?
I'm being asked to pay more for almost every area of my life due to a carbon tax, and based on what? A myriad of models guaranteeing every situation that comes along will be covered by one model or another?

Will this tax go away if we enter a cooling era? No, there will be a model that predicts that as well won't there be?



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Painterz
You know it's only really in America where this weird anti-science sentiment exists about climate change.

The rest of the world is onboard with the 99% of climate scientists in agreeing it's a real problem.

Yet in America there's this odd circle of people who refuse to believe the hard science, because... they know better than climate scientists because they read some right-wing blogs funded by the oil industry?

Bizarre.



Right! And America is the only place with an oil industry.

And it's Anti-BS not anti science.

Btw, where is the f'n SCIENCE for alternative energy that won't cost an arm and a leg and clean that can be massed produced for 2nd and 3rd world countries?

What? Not yet? In the mean time, we just shut things down and carbon tax industry for what again?

Until that comes online, the doom screamers can stfu.

Don't like the weather? Wait a minute.






posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 11:16 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee
Are you actually being taxed? There aren't a lot of carbon taxes out there in the real world.

I don't care about a carbon tax. I'm not going to argue for it. I don't see the relevance to the reality of anthropogenic global warming. A carbon tax won't be enough to reduce emissions, because economics is a pseudoscience and frequently wrong - that's the basis for why it ought to work.

Stop with throwing out "carbon tax," because I really don't give a #. Talk to me when you want to engage the subject (climate change), rather than some tangent (carbon tax).

The only thing that matters is the truth. The truth is that it the surface of the Earth is warming. There is no serious debate about this. We're causing it through our greenhouse gas emissions. There's no serious debate about this, either. The only 'serious debate' these days has turned to how much warming?

Enter the lukewarmers: Dr. Roy Spencer, Dr. Judith Curry, Anthony Watts. All your favorite fans. All accept the present warming, but reject that continuing warming will be significant/damaging.

Understand now this distinction: if you disagree that there has been or that there will be any warming, then you disagree with all three of these people, along with most other scientists engaged in earth sciences.
edit on 23Mon, 09 Jan 2017 23:18:02 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago1 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 11:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: dogstar23
a reply to: searcherfortruth

Ah! How refreshing to read I'm not the only one! Most people treat this either as "CO2 is the root of all global warming and we're all gonna die!" or, "There is no such thing as global warming, it snowed here today!"

Personally, my thoughts are that weather patterns - climate if you wish - are becoming more erratic and different faster than they were "before." I don't know why - I suspect many natural and man-made factors may be at play, but, I don't really care why.

I would rather we figure out how we're going to adapt to it. Not how we're going to "fix" it. We are creatures of adaptation - and we're far better at adapting than we are at change (subtle differences between the two.)



Well, Americans are turning into whales, so there is that.






posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven


Are you actually being taxed? There aren't a lot of carbon taxes out there in the real world.

Yes, our carbon tax came online January 1st, 2017.
It's the reason I made an account at ATS, to participate and try to better understand Climate Change.



edit on 9-1-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 01:08 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee
I assume you are from Alberta? Yup, we are getting effed royally, all in the name of a lie.



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 04:28 AM
link   
a reply to: angryproctologist

Well obviously you have been lucky enough to be born in a country with plenty.
China is trying to being two thirds of its people out of extreme poverty.
Let's see what you would do if your family was hungry on a regular basis?



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 06:08 AM
link   
Air + noise + land + water pollution is very real in many cities and places.

All the misinformation that make human to be the supreme cause of global warming is just plain ignorance and arrogance.

Just like misinformation by insurance industry regarding death cause statistics.
One big fraud...do you see die naturally or of old age in those statistics.
Of course not! Medically speaking, no one dies of old age.
It must be due to lung, heart failure, etc.



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 06:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Daalder

Miami is flooding?
Call the papers! nothing ever floods!

I feel humans haven't been keeping track of climate data accurately for long enough to draw all these conclusions.
Also saw a thing on the netflix last night about volcanic weather influence.

We just need one super volcano eruption and the earth's temps will drop, if it wasn't for the greenhouse effect the earth would still be an ice ball.

Things change, especially the weather.
I'm impartial on global warming. Climate change is an ongoing process, global warming and cooling is an ongoing process. I'm sure humans have an influence, but I think we're being pretty arrogant if we think we've irreparably changed the earth's atmosphere.



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Where's the science? Let's start with the fact that you don't even believe in science, otherwise you wouldn't be arguing. But you asked for science, so I'm going to give it to you.

blogs.scientificamerican.com...

Also, you might not realize this living in your own bubble, but solar energy is one of the cheapest forms of energy for folks who live areas without any power grids. Try understanding what it's like to live in a place where turning on the lights is a luxury.

You also might not realize that energy independence away from large oil and gas companies is actually something that is very much aligned with many American values.



originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Painterz
You know it's only really in America where this weird anti-science sentiment exists about climate change.

The rest of the world is onboard with the 99% of climate scientists in agreeing it's a real problem.

Yet in America there's this odd circle of people who refuse to believe the hard science, because... they know better than climate scientists because they read some right-wing blogs funded by the oil industry?

Bizarre.



Right! And America is the only place with an oil industry.

And it's Anti-BS not anti science.

Btw, where is the f'n SCIENCE for alternative energy that won't cost an arm and a leg and clean that can be massed produced for 2nd and 3rd world countries?





posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Let me try to summarize a debate with the new norm Trump Supporters:

Debate topic: The sky is blue

Trump Supporter: Actually it is Azure

Rest of the world: Azure is a shade of blue you are splitting hairs

Trump Supporter: In 1937 a color blind albino male said the sky was yellow

Rest of world: So does this one data point invalidate science

Trump supporter: I found one verifiable fact that counters your point therefore you are wrong



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Phage



They said that average temperature of July of 1936 was 0.03º warmer than July of 2012.

Again, please explain how we get two significant digits after the decimal. You can't increase the precision of a reading by averaging can you?


Yes, of course you can, because you're not measuring the same thing (temperature at a given place at a given date vs a spatial and temporal average and trend).



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: bronco73


I assume you are from Alberta? Yup, we are getting effed royally, all in the name of a lie.

This could turn out to be the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in the history of civilization. Our tax plan will be looked at as a model for the rest of the world. Canada couldn't meet the Kyoto accord targets, how will we meet the new targets set in Paris? I really don't think Global Greening is going to change one bit with these new taxes.



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee



This could turn out to be the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in the history of civilization.
Really? How will the rich benefit from it?
Don't a good number of people get a rebate? How much is it actually going to cost you?
www.cbc.ca...



Canada couldn't meet the Kyoto accord targets, how will we meet the new targets set in Paris?
There aren't really any specific targets set by the Paris agreement.

edit on 1/10/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 05:17 PM
link   


There aren't really any specific targets set by the Paris agreement.

An agreement with no targets, how will that work? Should be a non issue for America, i don't think it could pass thru the Senate there.
I answered your other question in a new thread.



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: searcherfortruth

Your belief in climate is irrelevant. It exists whether you like it or not, believe in it or not. Anthropocentric climate change is supported by scientific data collected. No amount of whining, complaining, or sticking your head in the sand will alter this fact. So get used to it and maybe do something about it.



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: richapau


So get used to it and maybe do something about it.

Do you have any answer as to what people are supposed to be doing?



posted on Jan, 10 2017 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: bronco73


I assume you are from Alberta? Yup, we are getting effed royally, all in the name of a lie.

This could turn out to be the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in the history of civilization. Our tax plan will be looked at as a model for the rest of the world. Canada couldn't meet the Kyoto accord targets, how will we meet the new targets set in Paris? I really don't think Global Greening is going to change one bit with these new taxes.




You forget one point. Our governments only want to tax us to a certain point otherwise we revolt. All governments know this...In the US we're comfortable, we know we're being taxed too much but it's not painful for us to do anything about it. You saw this in the last election, taxes weren't really a big debate point on either side.

They won't carbon tax us to death, I guarantee it. They can't



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join