Global Warming - One Of The Biggest Lies Every Told.

If you go to the popular search engine and type in "define: global warming" you get to see a page much likethis. I will quote here from the above source, "an increase of the earth's temperature by a few degrees resulting in an increase in the volume of water which contributes to sea-level rise." So by definition global warming is when the planet heats up and due to this the sea-level rises.

This has always baffled me on how such a problem can simply arise, no massive for warning, one minute were fine, next were not. Then i started to think like an ATS member, i started to think that maybe were not getting told the whole truth here, and from that thinking I'm going to show you the real truth behind global warming.

"Scientific research through U.S. Government satellite and balloon measurements shows that the temperature is actually cooling - very slightly - .037 degrees Celsius".

The above quote is a direct quote from a page from the APC, which is The American Policy Centre. These guys and gals are pretty darn clever and should be listened too.

The main points that people such as Al Gore and Leonardo Dicaprio bring up is that the polar ice caps are melting and that the earth is warming up, hence the named global warming. Polar ice caps could be melting because we produce too much toxins and so forth, alternatively it could be due to the fact that we are at the end of a ice age, this would make the ice melting a little...obvious. As for the earth warming up, i believe my previous quote rattles that theory a little.

image source: http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/Physics10/Nemesis%20book/%20Nemesis1_files/image003.gif


The above image is one i came about when researching Nibru, but it did show me that around every 26 million years there is a massive 'Reset' on Earth. But when is the next one....well its around about now, give or take 1 million years. Now periodic mass extinctions like that don't just happen, there can be many ways of it happening. Such as massive weather shift as in and ice age, super volcano erupting, planet becoming hurricane ally; Theres alot of explanations. I'm not trying to change your minds on Global warming, I'm just showing you a few points from over the fence.

Don't get me wrong i admire the politicians and scientists for sticking with this till its soon to come death. I suppose that it is a great excuse for such tings like 'Green tax' or the new 'Gas guzzlers tax'. Here in the UK there are expected to be more tax for global warming very soon in Alistair Campbell's upcoming budget report. There have been many lies told by governments to its people to maintain power for governments or individuals, but i truely belive that this lie is going to be made public very soon, top ranking scientists are starting to shout out against it now.

Well, what you think ?

Fox

I don't think that an organisation that presents itself as:
is the most credible source for scientific information.

Also, what most people ignore (I don't know why) is the global part of the expression.

It does not matter if in some place we have more or less cold days, the global warming is supposed to be the rising of the average temperature of the whole planet, not of a specific country or region.

And those that want to prove that global warming is a lie usually talk about scientific data but do not show it.

Also, even if we humans are not the responsible for it, we should try to reduce or delay the effects because they will affect a very percentage of the human population.

See Global Warming Is not a lie, So you shouldn't say that in your title. what the controversy seems to be is whether or not it is humans fault. Ice Caps are melting, but is it a pattern or is it man made.

Bottom line is Humans do put out more Green house gases then nature does. This is fact and can be read by the USGS .So if it is a natural thing that happens every what every 10s of thousands of years, It would be at least common sense to say we are doubling the speed of this natural change. Either way, being as green as you can stand is not a bad thing. And there are ALOT of people who think is more important then anything, more then who think it is bunk.

Me personally, I recycle because I feel its right. I want a hybrid car and would love to end our oil dependency because I am paying 3 bucks at the pump and we are to smart to think all we can use is goo from the ground to heat ourselves and drive our vehicles. This technology is is far to old for us to keep using it and will run out. So as I have stated before, just do your part to be a cleaner healthier person. And in turn you may or may not help or global warming issue. either way its a win win.

See the problem here is YOU may be smart enough to know its good to recycle etc. But the average joe on the street, uses threads like this to be lazy and think they have science behind them now to prove they do not have to give a crap about anyone but themselves.

If you really give a crap about this issue, really get into the data out there there are plenty studies about it. Be smart about it. Not just start another thread that doesn't debunk global warming, because some fool might actually use that as an argument to get a bigger truck and throw his paper and plastic on the ground. Ohh and I have actually seen people do it.

GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE. Not sorry about that caps.

Global warming is normal heating and cooling cycles, just given another name.

enough said. No one has ever proved that global warming is true!

reply to post by traderonwallst

---

If it is normal heating and cooling cycles with a different name then is not a lie.

If I call Mary you do not become a lie, you are just being identified with a different name (unless your name is Mary).

And shouting does not help.

Please post proofs of this, also even if it is a cycle, it is STILL global warming. So no it is NOT a lie. Just why it is happening is where the argument lies.

So Global Warming is the Globe Warming (Who wudda thunk) No matter the cause. Get it?

Do I need t o point out how incredibly stupid this is?

Let me sum this up for you Trader: "lie, true, lie"...Thanks for playing, better luck next time.

It is undeniable, the planet is WARMING up. The majority of scientific literature at the moment shows that humans are likely playing a big roll in this too. I do not deny that natural cycles are playing a roll in this, and I will not say that it is impossible for this to be 100% natural, I simply am going with what APPEARS to be the case.

So freak all you want deniers, I see global warming as largely anthropogenic, and this is based on the best evidence available.

Maybe global warming could be a positive thing.
The rise in temperature and rise in rainfall in some areas of the planet will maximise rice and wheat yields.
This will help out with the ever growing problem of food shortage on this planet.

reply to post by PeaceUk

---

Unfortunately, the tendency is not of a rise in rainfall, its a rise in the strength of the rain; it rains less often but when it rains it rains more and with larger rain drops, and that also has a negative effect, it washes away the soil, leading to desertification.

"the majority of scientific literature"

I find that statement to be evidence of the degree at which Al Gore and his buddies manipulate the facts. Ironic as they go along accusing everyone else of doing the same.

Check out these, then see just how strongly your "indisputable evidence" stands up. Also, actually take the thing in with an open mind, do not simply glance at it and cry "canard" like our certain nameless and hypocritical friend has done. Interesting as (s)he was the same one who I seem to recall eventually "running out of time" while hopelessly attempting to debate "those lies".

epw.senate.gov...

(continued)

Less credible than say the IPCC which is a special interest branch of a trouble plagued government organization? Does it matter what that organizations tax status is? Is what they said true or not? Satellite data tends to indicate it is true.

reply to post by Indy

---

Which government organisation is the IPCC a special interest branch?

The tax status was already there in their statement, after the "privately funded" and before the "grassroots action and education foundation", that was the only reason I posted.

And if satellite data is what shows the trend in the temperatures then we should use that instead of press releases and other things like that.

reply to post by SlyCM (work)

---

Show me the money man. Are you serious? Senator Inhofe's web bog is the evidence you are going to show me? The mega-denier himself? One bad link to a single bad REFERENCE where the crony of a mega-denier states that new data coming out is contrary to the standard (AGW) means very little, I would go so far as to say NOTHING. Like I said I am going to go with the MAJORITY view on this.

For how desperately some of you want to prove global warming has NOTHING to do with humans you surly do not provide any compelling evidence to support your theories.

Know this, the day that there is reasonable evidence to support that human are not playing a big part in global warming I will BELIEVE. The difference between myself and some of the deniers on th board is that I am willing to listen to reason and accept the assumed facts as science presents them.

Hi,

I'm new to posting here but have been a reader for quite some time. I just wanted to respond to this idea. Believe me, I'm not trying pick on ArMaP, or any individual poster. It's just that this idea is very central to the whole GW debate and it may be very misunderstood. I've seen it debated many times, and today I just decided to add my ideas to the mix.

Is there really a true average global temperature?



Please read the whole article, it's not very long, and it might make you think in a different way.

www.americanthinker.com...


There are other, even more simple concepts related to "average global temperature". Are there enough data collection points spaced at the appropriate locations to produce a representative number?

Are the data collecting devices properly maintained, and protected with stringent scientific method controls?

I think these are valid questions since this magical number of "average global temperature" is the only indicator of whether there is warming or cooling occuring.

Additionally, The average global temperature is most certainly not a static value. It must always be in flux. Whats is the natural frequency of the flux?

Will we all panic as much as we are now when it appears the world is cooling?

Personally, I'd prefer warmer vs. cooler.

Thanks for listening to my rambling ideas.

[edit on 3/12/2008 by RGReventlov]

[edit on 3/12/2008 by RGReventlov]

Well it appears my rather lengthy post failed to make it to the site. God damn ISP.

My reasons for being skeptical (not denial) of an anthropogenic global warming:
-very tiny time for observation. We have personally witnessed the Earth's climate for, what, one billionth of the time it has been around? Real science, and the proper scientific method do not happily agree with the current "overwhelming evidence" of AGW. A chemistry professor, for instance, wouldn't allow such a small amount of data to be concluded upon so strongly by his students; so why should proponents of AGW be allowed the same?
-very high degree of natural climate variability. The Cenozoic in particular has seen the Earth fly in and out of ice ages. The Holocene Maximum is a very important but unsurprisingly overlooked period of time in which global temperatures were beyond what they are today or what are predicted to be in a couple hundred years; an interglacial period, just like what we are experiencing today. This was before man was industrialized at all.
-CO2's relatively minor contribution to the greenhouse effect. Water vapour and methane are much more powerful GHG than CO2, and water vapour has an exponentially greater concentration in the atmosphere than does CO2.

My reasons for being especially skeptical of AGW catastrophism is the relative ease that global fauna have survived previous interglacial periods, or the entire Mesozoic; and also the apparent advancement humanity underwent during the Holocene Maximum.



That is what I would call a "ridiculous statement" because proponents of an AGW have so far failed to to provide convincing evidence, and rather use circular arguments such as "our evidence is so strong I don't even have to reference it".

I will admit to having once been as convinced of an AGW as anyone else (An Inconvenient Truth helped that along, especially regarding Mr. Gore's totally unfounded doomsday prophecies), but being curious as to what the other side had to say I looked at that too, and it soon became obvious that I was "fighting" on the wrong side. Realizing the negative consequences of a world "going green", that is, starving the developing countries of a critical ingredient for development, sealed the deal.

What seems especially frustrating is the fact that people attribute hot summer days to AGW. Though I do not agree with Gore on most respects, I will credit him with the fact that he is excellent at swaying the ignorant; that is, he sure can herd the sheep.

reply to post by RGReventlov

---

You (and the article you posted shows it) may be right, we may be fooled by the way the measurements are made, by the formula used and by the lack of data, but what I was trying to say is that most people that deny global warming do it because:

1. They don't like Al Gore (I only saw him on TV maybe 10 or 15 times in my life, here in Portugal he is not a popular person).

2. They don't think in global and average (whatever that may mean) terms, they think only about their town, their area or their country, forgetting the rest of the planet, which includes large uninhabited areas.

3. They focus on the human origin of global warming and, because they think that our influence is null or negligible (and they may be right) they think that global warming does not exist.


I don't really know if the Earth is heading for a global warming, but what I do know is that the effects (reducing of glaciers, death of animals and plants that live in colder regions, lessened effects of the winter on the fauna and flora, etc.) of what appears to be a global warming have been happening for some time.

I think it was a pretty naff article really, just more obfuscation from the obfuscators.

Anyway, you'll be happy to hear...


data.giss.nasa.gov...


[edit on 12-3-2008 by melatonin]

The idea that man is to blame for other reasons, such as the destruction of rainforests or albedo change, in my opinion makes much more sense than the idea that anthropogenic CO2 is causing temperature rise. Furthermore, I would much sooner endorse those types of efforts (i.e., "save the rainforest" ) than I would endorse starving an entire continent through not allowing them oil.

However, the man-made effect, in my opinion, should still be minimal and certainly not catastrophic.

[edit on 13-3-2008 by SlyCM (work)]

AGW in its current form is at least misleading on purpose

i don't know how many threads like this one i've stumbled upon, just to add a few links and tried to convince people of what should be obvious, namely that climate changes and blaming it on CO2 is just as narrow minded as believing that we could stop it, if only we tried hard enough.

it's not going to happen. wishful thinking is just that...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

besides, there are more pressing issues, with real environmental impact, pollution through toxins, overfishing, land use, with all its assorted consequences, like erosion, soil depletion and deforestation. of course, adressing these does not yield a free (subsidized) lunch for the corp's, like biofuels do and the political fallout of these more trivial problems does not keep someone like AlBore in the news. saving the world... send James Bond a fairy tale of epic proportions.

feeling is no substitute for substance. people had better learn that lesson, before they're cheated out of everything and the world around them is destroyed. feeling cannot replace substance. people had better learn that lesson, before they're cheated out of everything and the world around them is destroyed by vacant-eyed herd instinct and opportunistic 'leaders' exploiting it for their own nefarious purposes.

Well said.

There are no greater terrestrial based threats to future human advancement than continued unchecked population growth and resouce consumption.