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.


Rise in temperatures and CO2 follow each other closely in climate change

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 08:35 PM
reply to post by Nathan-D

Try the vast majority of climatologists!

Wow you are seriously out of your element!

posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 08:57 PM
reply to post by unityemissions
You mean to say that the majority of climatologists worldwide agree that methane is a threat and might overheat the planet? That's fascinating. How do you know this?

As for the so-called 'overwhelming consensus' on CAGW, that's not real.

Here's a good article at Forbes by professor Larry Bell that goes into detail and explains how they arrived at the often-touted '98% of scientists agree with CAGW-figure'.

Quote from the article:

So where did that famous “consensus” claim that “98% of all scientists believe in global warming” come from? It originated from an endlessly reported 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) survey consisting of an intentionally brief two-minute, two question online survey sent to 10,257 earth scientists by two researchers at the University of Illinois. Of the about 3.000 who responded, 82% answered “yes” to the second question, which like the first, most people I know would also have agreed with.

Then of those, only a small subset, just 77 who had been successful in getting more than half of their papers recently accepted by peer-reviewed climate science journals, were considered in their survey statistic. That “98% all scientists” referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered “yes”.

That anything-but-scientific survey asked two questions. The first: “When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?” Few would be expected to dispute this…the planet began thawing out of the “Little Ice Age” in the middle 19th century, predating the Industrial Revolution. (That was the coldest period since the last real Ice Age ended roughly 10,000 years ago.)

The second question asked: “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?” So what constitutes “significant”? Does “changing” include both cooling and warming… and for both “better” and “worse”? And which contributions…does this include land use changes, such as agriculture and deforestation?

Read more here.
edit on 24-7-2012 by Nathan-D because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 03:58 AM

Originally posted by ErEhWoN
Theres nothing to 'fall' for, except denial.

The data doesn't lie....

Data is made to lie all time ... but thats irrelevant. They said the same about photo's once, remember?

Please provide the source for the graph, becazuse i have not seen anything similar, except michael mann's fraudulent hockey stick graph.

Which is worse: denying a dodgy story or accepting it at face value? We're supposed to be critical thinkers. And that graph is impossible, and unproven.

posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:13 AM

Originally posted by Nathan-D
reply to post by ErEhWoN

The data doesn't lie....

How do you know the ice-core data is correct? It contradicts other data. Stomata-data shows atmospheric CO2 as high as 459ppmv during this interglalcial period and chemical-measurements have shown CO2 as high as 440ppmv during 1880. From the research I have done into this subject, it appears to me that the ice-core data underestimates past CO2-levels.
edit on 24-7-2012 by Nathan-D because: (no reason given) you know when it is time to start to panic? That is the time when THE UNITED STATES developing an Arctic Based Carrier Group to patrol and keep international shipping lanes which will very soon be available for use as the Ice Pack Melts as well as many Nations...fighting RIGHT NOW over Oil Platform Drilling Rights.

Russia even went to the trouble of using a DEEP OCEAN DIVING SUB with Robotic Arms to plant a RUSSIAN FLAG ON THE BOTTOM OF THE ARCTIC OCEAN as a way to declare Drilling Rights. When the U.S. Military starts Game Planning...THAT IS THE MOMENT when you KNOW that this is REAL and not some BULL S#!%!

It is not the Temp. that is the issue it is if the High Temps. melt too much Fresh Water. Watch the Movie...THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW! What happens in that movie has ACTUALLY HAPPENED BEFORE! Most likely due to the eruption of a Massive Volcano and subsequent dual possibility of so much particulates in the atmosphere that they blocked out the SUN...or....Methane and C02 levels causing massive ICE MELT of GREENLAND Fresh Water Ice Pack as well as Polar Ice Pack melt. Without the GULF STREAM which conveys warm water NORTH and COLD water it will stall because Salt Water is Heavier and too much lighter Fresh water in the system...will cause this tidal Heat Conveyance System to STOP DEAD and Warm water will not travel North as is why England has MILD WINTERS...once this happens...ICE AGE very quickly as too much water not locked in ice will create STORMS of a SIZE that will be Continental in size. They will be like Hurricanes and draw Super Cold Air generated from clusters of thunderstorms in the Arctic would penetrate deep into the stratosphere. The superstorm sucks vast quantities of frigid upper atmospheric air down to the surface, flash freezing any living thing caught outside. However, any graduate of a high school physics course could tell you that the air would warm on its descent in response to the requirements of the Ideal Gas Law, and would never be able to flash freeze anything. The thing has happened as Mammoths have been found with food in their mouths such as various plants and grass..that were PERFECTLY PRESERVED. This can only happen by FLASH FREEZING so something was going on regardless of scientific issues and UNLIKE the MOVIE...all Hurricane Storms either Summer or Winter will turn COUNTER CLOCK WISE. Split Infinity

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in