It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


CONFIRMED: Global Warming 'Ended 15 Years Ago'

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 05:50 AM
reply to post by Ghostfreak1

Plus we were eating christmas dinner in 12C here in the uk

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 06:30 AM
Anyone who believes what they read in the Daily Mail is a fool. It is a very well known paper renouned for "distorting" the truth for the hidden agenda of its extreme right wing owners......I mean DUH come on!.

If anyone took the time to look into the source of the article the above statement becomes bleedin obvious.

You have choice people, believe the Daily Mail lies in order to prop up your Cognitive Dissonance or do what it says in the top left corner of this site.........

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 06:38 AM
The region of the SE US that I live in right now has pretty much had the same weather patterns going back 40 years. The funny part about it is that we go through cycles here of cold/mild winters and hot/mild summers. Most of us "old timers" remember other winters being warm (like this winter), and other summers being mild (like last summer) in our area.

Just the other day I was talking with my step mother, who remember the winter of 72-73 in this area was just like this winter: cold snaps in November and December, then temps jumping up to the 70's, and a very mild January, with even thunder storms.
Then in Feb. a ton of snow was dumped here. Enough so that her niece was born in the back of a national guard truck.

We've had summers with scorching 100's and high humidity, and then summers where that 100 mark was rarely reached. We've had winters where it got down to single digits, and winters where we went outside in shorts in January.
We went several years without hardly any snow here at the beginning of this century. Then 3 years ago, we had one day that it snowed 6 inches. The following winter, it snowed again on a single day about 5 inches. Then last winter, it actually snowed 3 times! Very rare for us, but not unheard of.
So far this year, we had a few cold snaps, but mostly mild temps.

My point: going back and looking at weather news archives, this is not special, nor unusual, but rather perfectly normal for where we live. We go through cycles, and while they are not dead on (meaning exactly every 5 years, or 10 years, etc), there is a general flux of back and forth for both winters and summers here.
What really gets me, is the younger generation in my area jumping up and screaming "Global Warming!" because of the mild winter we've had this year. Most of us older people tell them to calm down, and actually watch the weather, as even the weather people are saying this has nothing to do with "Global Warming" or "Climate Change", but instead has to do with weather patterns (that Low over Greenland) and what the jet stream is doing, which is also influenced by the ocean current La Nina, etc, etc. That us older people actually remember having winters like this in the past.

Is there "Global Warming" or "Climate Change"? Well DUH.....the Earth is anything but constant. It's constantly changing. Always has, always will. It's more of a question of how much of this change is caused by us human beings.
I really have no idea. I do know that we can ruin a river, destroy a lake, remove countless acres of trees, destroy natural habitats, over fish areas of our oceans, and make other species extinct. THAT is a fact that nobody can argue against.
We can increase radioactivity in places by using nuclear weapons or having nuclear reactors melt down. We can use spray cans to weaken our ozone, surround our major cities with toxic gases (read that as smog). This is all pretty well known.
But I think we still have a lot to learn about how much of it affects our planet and to what degree. Obviously not having any of this stuff would most likely be better for the planet.

But keep in mind this: let's say we do completely get rid of our carbon foot print as human beings. That we some how become the "perfect" guest of our planet and go completely green.
You all do realize that the Earth itself does things whether we are here or not?

250 million years ago, over 90 percent of life on the face of this planet was wiped out. This was due to a massive volcanic erruption that lasted a million years, and is today called the Siberian Traps. This eruption dumped so much CO2 into our atmosphere that global temps went up by 10 degrees. Not 2, not 3, and not 4, but 10.
This in turn raised water temps so that the methane ice in many places melted, releasing even more green house gas into the atmosphere (methane is like 20 times more of a green house gas than CO2), and caused another 10 degree rise in temps, bringing the grand total to 20 degrees.

My other point: we were not around driving cars, building factories, or dumping anything into the air. There wasn't even dinosaurs yet. But the Earth itself caused a "Global Warming" even that far surpasses anything that that people are screaming about now.

So keep in mind that while yes, I do think we impact our planet, I think we still have a lot to learn on how much we do. But we do know that the Earth itself changes and can make changes no mater what we humans do.
edit on 30-1-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 06:48 AM
The more I delve into various topics on ATS the more confused I get. Now I would expect that in some of the more 'out there' threads but this is supposedly 'science' based. Not saying that science doesn't confuse me (I wish :lol
but here I am reading about stuff that appears to be now refuted which was originally reported as science fact. I feel I've got my head around one thing only for another version of 'the truth' to come along and knock me sideways.

I guess truth and reality only exists inside our heads and we can either coexist with each other in tolerance of each others' realities - or have a fight about it!. One thing I do know is that is to truly evolve as an intelligent species we need to stop being so arogant to think our reality is the only correct one. And now I've got a headache, anyone got an aspirin?


posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 07:02 AM
How convenient to start of the debunking around record year 1998.

Besides that, 10-15 years just ain't enough claiming trend changes, at most it indicates a possible change. For now I would say, based on averages the trend is flattening. Come back in 10-15 years, maybe then you can prove your point.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 07:43 AM
reply to post by chrismir

that is a fail chart, and you are spreading lies. maybe this scientist from australia will clue you in on how climate really changes over time

edit on 30-1-2012 by snapoutofit because: fixed link part 2 part 3 part 4
edit on 30-1-2012 by snapoutofit because: added the other parts of the video

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 07:49 AM
reply to post by kn0wh0w

and al bundy made more sense!!!

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:15 AM
reply to post by TrueAmerican


Thanks to minor007 who linked to the latest publications from the MET here.

Completely contradicting the source material in the OP:

The prediction follows provisional figures published by the Met Office and University of East Anglia last month which showed that 2011 saw temperatures 0.36 °C above the long term average and is currently ranked the 11th warmest year on record in the HadCRUT3 temperature dataset.

This link will take you to a full list of the MET's 2012 publications, none of which have anything remotely close to what was published in the OP.

This link will take you to a full list of the MET's 2011 publications, again none of which have anything remotely close to what was published in the OP.

My favorite quote from the 2011 index of articles is:

The assessment commissioned by Chris Huhne, the UK's Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, and lead by the Met Office Hadley Centre studied 24 different countries, from developed to developing. It notes that all the countries in the study have warmed since the 1960s and that the occurrence of extremely warm temperatures has increased whilst extremely cold temperatures have become less frequent.

Sorry OP, I am calling hoax on your assertions, or those of your sources. I think the time has come you find the source your sources are referring to, which I dont think you will be able to do. Perhaps I overlooked something, but I dont think so.

Thanks for the entertainment all the same.

edit on 30-1-2012 by Animal because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:25 AM
Well then why has it been in the 40F range this whole damn winter. I don't need a stupid study to tell me the planet is getting warm or not.

Sometimes it seems like scientists treat humans like brainless zombies.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:28 AM
I hate to be a whiner about the SOURCE here -- but this is World Net Daily and Daily Mail.

Do we have any sources OTHER than Rupert Murdoch and Koch brothers -- proven backers of propaganda and disinformation?

It's not like proving ONE or TWO stories from these outfits as correct -- it's like proving that they ever do anything correct at all.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:33 AM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

An Inconvenient Spoof, to get in our wallets. That's all it was, Mr. Gore. Thanks, buddy.
Didn't get none of mine, sorry. Actually, I am not sorry. Scratch that. :shk:

I think your belief that Climate Change is just an excuse to 'get in our wallets' is misdirected. If anyone is looking to get in our wallets, its the capitalists and corporations that use legitimate findings to put money in their pockets.

Whether you believe in climate change or not, don't argue that it is all a guise to make a profit. Climate change from a scientific perspective and climate change from a financial perspective are two completely separate issues altogether.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:39 AM
reply to post by fenceSitter

The 'climate change is a scam to get into our wallets' is a fairly successful attempt at 'framing'. That is to say turning the conversation / argument into something other than a review of research, evidence and fact.

This 'frame' shifts the conversation to another topic all together, which is corruption, control and powerlessness. It moves the focus from the quantitative to the qualitative - from science fact to emotional evaluation.

This 'frame' was created because through such a view you will never be able to prove anything but you will be able to make people FEEL.

I give credit to those who understand the tool of 'framing' and are able to use it well - it shows a high level of intelligence.

I also think these people are scum.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:44 AM
Global warming was a fact during the last century, but I always argued that it was a natural process following the last mini-iceage and less influenced by man. The question never been if there was global warming in this period but why it happened.

This thread already point to most of the factors that has influence on our global temperature.

But it ignores the fact that CO2 is (one among other) greenhouse gases. All of these gasses got influence on our atmosphere. It is estimated that carbon dioxid is behind 9-26% of the greenhouse effect and that most of this effect is caused by water vapors in the sky (36-72%) the percentages is affected by temperature and vice versa.

Most of Earth carbon dioxid is stored in the oceans and is occilating between the Earth and the atmosphere. Studies in this field are inconclusive, some show the oceans absorb more carbon dioxid than they emmit other studies show the opposite.

If we add "unlimited" amounts of carbon dioxid into the atmosphere you get real manmade global warming, but I seriously doubt thats the case at moment. I believe we still got some margin before we hit a critical level of carbon dioxid. Adding a little more carbon dioxid into the atmosphere would create better conditions for plants, who would produce more oxygen thereby creating better conditions for animals. Remeber greenery houses use a artificial environment with 4-5 times the level of carbon dioxid compared to our atmosphere to stimulate plant growth. I never heard about a gardener who died from carbon dioxid poisoning at work.

It is true that there is a correlation between increase in temperature and carbon dioxid in the last century, but the correlation between temperature and and debt to GDP is actually closer, so should we claim debt caused global warming??

The correlation between sunspot activity and temperature is also very close to each other. If we assume temperature is controled by the amount of carbon dioxid, wouldn't we logically have to say then temperature controls the amount of sunspots?...

Last but not least. If you go far enough back in time the correlation between temperature and carbon dioxid is way off indicating they do not control each other as directly as the preechers of the global warming hoax want you to believe.

It's already mentioned but let me repeat....Go and look at some of the documents in the Climategate scandal to get links to more than 600 documents regarding the global warming hoax.

That was a long post just to say man also influence the global temperature but nowhere near as much as the hoax claim's.
I fully agree with people on this forum that the idea behind global warming is being hoaxed and used as a instrument in the attemp to create a global empire.

Greenhouse gas

Soaring Debt To GDP Is More Reponsible For Global Warming Than Rising CO2 Levels (I cant get this link to work

edit on 30-1-2012 by Mimir because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:54 AM
What gets me is that there are two studies here saying NO Global Warming -- and there are thousands of studies that do.

Jumping on the bandwagon from two studies (putting aside the known propaganda that comes from these two outfits), doesn't this kind of fly in the face of "let's not jump on this until the research is settled."

A Person writing "confirmed" after two junk rags publish a paper is pretty much taking the sketchiest stance.

>> It seems clear that the people who have a problem with Global Warming -- are people who have a problem with Global Warming and NOT the 'weak studies" or that the "jury is still out." They jump on ANYTHING that says it didn't happen, or that humans have no control -- no matter how dodgy the source.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:08 AM
Oh dear... people that think global warming is a hoax.

Is that why weve had 2 days of snow all winter in New York? Its also been like this the past 3 years. And migration cycles are later, blooming cycles earlier. The evidence for global warming is overwhelming and NASA has proven time and time again with statistical data that the atmosphere retains more heat molecules then it can release.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:08 AM
I don't care what the "experts" say. They say whatever they want to suit their agenda...all of them! I have, without a doubt experienced more heat in Trinidad over the past 10 years. They may say no, but my body says hell yes! And it's not just here. Many people, from all around the globe have noticed hotter days over the past several years. What's the cause? I do not know. One minute its carbon emissions, the next; it's the entire solar system is heating up. Some experts say it's the sun, others say it's our own fault, then there are others saying global warming isn't even occurring. Either way, the "experts" need to get their sh*t straight and come to a conclusive decision. Because they can't seem to do so. As far as I'm concerned, they either don't know sh*t, or are lying to the masses to achieve their own corrupt desires. I'll listen to my body thank you. And my body says...things are becoming hot as hell!
edit on 30-1-2012 by sdrawkcabII because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:09 AM
reply to post by Mimir

The "ClimateGate" was more propaganda -- it was irrefutably proven that the data was not rigged. Climategate was another bogus attempt to subvert the truth.

NO. I won't bother with a link -- I just don't really care to waste my time "Convincing" people who will never be convinced. Who don't understand outlier data.

This "scheme" to create a New World Order is kind of silly -- since the Old World Order has been running things just fine, and the Fossilized Fuel industry led by Koch brothers, can get away with murder and propaganda on a daily basis. "Carbon Taxes" are or "fighting global warming" is supposed to be some scam to help them RULE THE WORLD? "They" already do. Look around at your Republican candidates. Look around at how BP killed the Gulf and the Coast Guard protected them.

George Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld committed war crimes and invaded two countries. Pushed a program of torture. Stole $2.4 trillion from the Social Security trust fund and left an IOU. They have not only not been arrested, they went on a "victory tour" to tell the future "what happened" and nobody in the Media said; "Prove it."

>> The USA already lost the war to Fascism. We've been infiltrated and not only are the people behind this not worried -- they've got thousands of Americans saying Global Warming isn't taking place, saying that Government needs to stop getting in the way of business after 4 decades of that has led to ruin, saying that evolution is a lie, saying whatever keeps the populace broken and fighting so they can pick our pockets.

Your idea of stopping the Al Gore / Climatologist led secret cabal to take control of the world is a little late. The WORLD would have to be freed first -- and why would the World Order do that?

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:09 AM
i say nay, wheres the snow. just more smoke bvlown up our

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:18 AM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

My warm Chicago winter disputes this finding OP.

This is a second line.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:25 AM
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

The "ClimateGate" was more propaganda -- it was irrefutably proven that the data was not rigged. Climategate was another bogus attempt to subvert the truth.
NO. I won't bother with a link -- I just don't really care to waste my time "Convincing" people who will never be convinced. Who don't understand outlier data.

Realy....I could say same thing about ignorance to you when you dont even care about a link. Claiming I wouldnt understand it anyways is even more ignorant.

I did not deny global warming.

What i said is that the mans influence on global warming most likely is a lot less than what the general concensus say's.

But when you have seen loads of "scientific studies" that claim global warming will increase ocean sea levels up to 100 meters this idea lose a lot of its credibility. The same can be said when hoaxmasters like the "inventer of the internet"(Al Gore) presents the idea.

I agree with you that there is a scary increase in facism, but you ignore the fact that the populations dont want growing empires. The people behind projects like the European Union and the United Nations use global warming as a tool to gain control of the souvereign countries economies and as an argument for larger empires (common goals). We may disagree on that point but that's ok with me I dont claim i speak the absolute truth, I just offer you my point of view on this.

edit on 30-1-2012 by Mimir because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in