So much for Global Warming

a reply to: CryHavoc

Speak for yourself, it was near 125F in my place.

These freakish things happen, a week ago I was in paradise, two days later I was in an oven. Climate change is a bitch, A few years ago we didn't have a summer, then we were getting summer thunderstorms in winter, i've been living in the same location for almost 20 years and you could set your clock to the weather, now you're better off setting the clock to the actual time.

It's a minor inconvenience, but the moment it starts snowing in the tropics i will begin to get worried.

a reply to: CryHavoc

again
weather and climate are not the same thing.
weather is the conditions right now.
Climate is the overall conditions over long periods of time.
So its cold. Its late November. Thats the weather.
What is the average temperature in Chicago over a years time?
What was it two years ago?
Ten years ago?

Chicago has had more days over 100 recently too.

a reply to: superman2012

no

a reply to: hunamongyou

no you have to believe the scientists not politicians.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: hunamongyou

no you have to believe the scientists not politicians.

Conveniently leave out how YOUR scientists have been caught time and again falsifying the data, erasing raw temperature data, making false claims time and again which they had to remake every year.

Plenty of scientists disagree with your "belief' in AGW.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: hunamongyou

no you have to believe the scientists not politicians.

Conveniently leave out how YOUR scientists have been caught time and again falsifying the data, erasing raw temperature data, making false claims time and again which they had to remake every year.

Plenty of scientists disagree with your "belief' in AGW.

show me a climatologist who disagrees with AGW who is NOT on the payroll of an oil company. Go ahead, I am legit interested

a reply to: StoneCircles

none of the links show consistent warming parallel to earth, not even close.

Eh, that's a source of debate where Mars is concerned. As for the others, no one is really sure... it's hard to get thermometers to reach that far and we're still speculating on the climate mechanisms.

All I am saying is we should keep an open mind. There is no foregone conclusion that recently observed warming is caused primarily by carbon dioxide levels, nor that the recently observed warming is even going to continue. We simply don't know. We do know more about the Earth's climate than we do the climate of the other planets, and yet we have difficulty in accuracy one week out. Maybe, just maybe, this one time we don't have all the answers.

Nah, can't be it. It's got to be that last 0.005% of the atmosphere! What was I thinking?

TheRedneck

California hasn't had a winter in forever...

Much like Trump, most people who think there is no climate change can't explain why they disagree. Unless they are using their personal life experience.

a reply to: TheRedneck

We don't have all the answers, but I'm not sure why so many people are avidly against climate change without having a scientific opinion..

Trump couldn't even explain why he disagreed. I mean what's more likely? Corporations trying to discourage climate change through propaganda so they can continue endless pollution. Or many scientists lying so politicians like Obama and al gore can push a tax law??

I'm skeptical too, but when a ton of scientists are all agreeing on something, we should probably listen.

a reply to: blueman12

We don't have all the answers, but I'm not sure why so many people are avidly against climate change without having a scientific opinion..

Believing Global Warning is not carbon dioxide based is a scientific opinion. It's actually more scientific than going along with the crowd, because it recognizes that science by its very nature is a journey of questions, not a destination of answers.

Trump couldn't even explain why he disagreed. I mean what's more likely? Corporations trying to discourage climate change through propaganda so they can continue endless pollution. Or many scientists lying so politicians like Obama and al gore can push a tax law??

Not everyone can effectively elucidate on their beliefs. Trump is more action that talk.

As for which is more likely, I'd say it's even. Scientists are human too, and if there's no grant money to say Global Warming isn't what the grantors want it to be, and plenty of money to say it is, they're going to go for the money. That's what I hate about this whole debate; it has corrupted science. Science is about trying to find the truth, be that truth in line with present agendas or not.

I'm skeptical too, but when a ton of scientists are all agreeing on something, we should probably listen.

Oh, I listen. But I also consider. I know how the heating cycle works, about as well as anyone. The numbers simply do not add up. So I have to question the results, and that has led me to disbelieve in the theory.

TheRedneck

Why, oh why, does our poor, defenseless little planet, hurling through the unknown expanse of space, orbiting around the sun, and spinning like a top, all at the same time, find the time to start actin' warm, now??


Golly gee, folks!

a reply to: TheRedneck

all i see you doing is saying "well scientists say stuff but I disagree"

but you haven't posted any science yourself, any evidence or any proof of anything you hold to be true.

Just saying "well I understand all this stuff better than the scientists who spent 40 years studying it so therefore its not true" makes you sound arrogant and ignorant at the same time.

show your work. Post some evidence. Put up or shut up.

look at this chart

look how CO2 and planetary warming mirror each other closely for thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and housands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and housands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and housands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and housands and thousands and thousands and thousands and of years thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and housands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and housands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and housands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and housands and thousands and thousands and thousands and of years.

www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

are you telling me thats just a huge coincidence? Seems pretty absurd to suggest so.

One of the most remarkable aspects of the paleoclimate record is the strong correspondence between temperature and the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere observed during the glacial cycles of the past several hundred thousand years. When the carbon dioxide concentration goes up, temperature goes up. When the carbon dioxide concentration goes down, temperature goes down. A small part of the correspondence is due to the relationship between temperature and the solubility of carbon dioxide in the surface ocean, but the majority of the correspondence is consistent with a feedback between carbon dioxide and climate.

a reply to: StoneCircles

all i see you doing is saying "well scientists say stuff but I disagree"

Yes.

but you haven't posted any science yourself, any evidence or any proof of anything you hold to be true.

Patience, grasshopper.

Just saying "well I understand all this stuff better than the scientists who spent 40 years studying it so therefore its not true" makes you sound arrogant and ignorant at the same time.

In the first place, I did not say "better than." I said "as well as." There's a difference.

In the second place, this is not the only thread on ATS about the Global Warming scam. I have been actively posting the proof and links you so fervently request for many years now. They're ignored. So while I appreciate your desire to have me spend all my time searching through globs of links to find actual science rather than the oft-touted opinions of someone on what a scientist said (see "in the first place" above), I am afraid I must decline your invitation. Your opinion of me due to such is irrelevant, to say the least.

Thirdly, research is ongoing. It takes time to get everything together and ensure that assumptions and references are all valid. As I already said, patience grasshopper. I do not work on your schedule unless and until you are financially supporting my work. If you wish to do so, you may PM me with your offer and I will consider it.

show your work. Post some evidence. Put up or shut up.

May I ask what research you have conducted?

TheRedneck

a reply to: StoneCircles

Correlation does not prove causation. There are still three distinct possibilities:

• Carbon dioxide levels drive temperature
  
• Temperature drives carbon dioxide levels
  
• Carbon dioxide levels and temperature are both driven by another root occurrence.

Nice use of the word "thousands." Very professional.

TheRedneck

Global warming is a misnomer when applied for people that want to deny climate change. Mankind is pummeling the environment causing great damage. All one has to do is see how quickly climate has changed since the advent of the Industrial Revolution. The Earth has experienced this same thing before, but it took tens of thousands of years to reach the tipping point that killed many species and gave rise to mammals, thus homo sapiens. Ironic, isn't it? You might want to buckle in, CryHavoc, things are about to get really crazy. Why? Because mankind will deny his role in the problem and will inadvertently push the Earth towards a tipping point we will have no ability to mitigate any deleterious effects of climate change. Enjoy the ride.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: StoneCircles

Correlation does not prove causation. There are still three distinct possibilities:

• Carbon dioxide levels drive temperature
  
• Temperature drives carbon dioxide levels
  
• Carbon dioxide levels and temperature are both driven by another root occurrence.

Nice use of the word "thousands." Very professional.

TheRedneck

right and people have been studying this for literally 150 years now. We have decades and decades of data from really really smart people and ALL of it demonstrates that CO2 drives warming.

Post actual evidence otherwise or pipe down.

originally posted by: tabularosa
Because mankind will deny his role in the problem and will inadvertently push the Earth towards a tipping point we will have no ability to mitigate any deleterious effects of climate change. Enjoy the ride.

True, by the time everyone pulls their head out of their nether regions it will be too late to mitigate the utter disaster we are about to face.

Tragic.

a reply to: turbonium1

Industrialisation, technological advancements, civilisations, humanity, consumerism/consumption etc etc