Yesterday’s high - 85 degrees
The record high? 102 in 1933. Was it really that much hotter during the dust bowl era and why didn’t they freak out about global warming then?
We set 6 record high days in a 10 day span during spring in Ohio.
For the record I think they’re a terrible statistic to use if you’re trying to prove/disprove global warming, but I wanted to throw it out there and make you look dumb.
Don’t feed the troll. Please don’t bump. We’ve done this thread too many times.
[quote]red04 wrote:
We set 6 record high days in a 10 day span during spring in Ohio.
For the record I think they’re a terrible statistic to use if you’re trying to prove/disprove global warming, but I wanted to throw it out there and make you look dumb.[/quote]
How does this make me look dumb? Records were meant to be broken. 4 of those 10 days were not record highs. In fact, there is evidence that proves that at multiple points in time, the earth was MUCH much hotter than it is now.
Not trolling. There’s nothing wrong with a healthy discussion folks.
so a few especially hot days in one american state compared to each other can prove disprove global warming?
It’s not Athens (not enough historic data) but Atlanta, but it’s close enough:
Scroll down to Weather History & Forecast, and instead of “Current Week” select “All”.
Now look at the red line.
[quote]caveman101 wrote:
so a few especially hot days in one american state compared to each other can prove disprove global warming?[/quote]
To disprove something, it must be proved first.
[quote]caveman101 wrote:
so a few especially hot days in one american state compared to each other can prove disprove global warming?[/quote]
no, basic science and historical data disprove AGW . . . new to these threads?
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
[quote]caveman101 wrote:
so a few especially hot days in one american state compared to each other can prove disprove global warming?[/quote]
To disprove something, it must be proved first.[/quote]
You can’t prove a theory to be wrong without it first being right? I don’t think so…
[quote]florin wrote:
It’s not Athens (not enough historic data) but Atlanta, but it’s close enough:
Scroll down to Weather History & Forecast, and instead of “Current Week” select “All”.
Now look at the red line.[/quote]
Thanks for the web site i have been looking for something like this
Phoenix’s high is relativly the same but the lows are creeping up and are flat lining
[quote]NAUn wrote:
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
[quote]caveman101 wrote:
so a few especially hot days in one american state compared to each other can prove disprove global warming?[/quote]
To disprove something, it must be proved first.[/quote]
You can’t prove a theory to be wrong without it first being right? I don’t think so…[/quote]
I was just about to say the same thing. Okay to prove this is not an Elephant we must first prove that it IS an Elephant…
Guys! Global Warming isn’t real! The other day it was cold! It can’t be cold if the earth is getting warmer!
lol thread is lol
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]caveman101 wrote:
so a few especially hot days in one american state compared to each other can prove disprove global warming?[/quote]
no, basic science and historical data disprove AGW . . . new to these threads?[/quote]
New to science?
The question doesn’t have to do with warming or cooling, the question is, is the activity of man making it warmer artificially…
There are many issues with this theory. First, the Earth warms and cools all the fucking time. Sometimes it’s faster, sometimes it’s slower, but the one constant is that the Earth’s climate is perpetually changing.
The variables contributing to climate are to numerous to even comprehend. You cannot say that CO2 is the boogie man and man is the cause of it. The CO2 in the atmosphere if 0.039% That’s pretty small. If we make it .04% it’s not going to make a shit lick’s worth of difference. That’s if it’s even possible.
Like animals, the Earth also has self correcting mechanisms. For instance, what do you know about hurricanes? Well, other than being big bad annoying storms they also serve a vital purpose, they cool the Earth. So if the Earth warms, and it doesn’t like it, a few hurricanes later and we are cooled back off.
Another issue, there is no such thing as “Green energy” Each method for creating electricity, has an environmental impact. Wind farms take huge swaths of land and fuck up local ecosystems. Solar is inefficient to create, very inefficient to run, take up huge areas of ecosystem, etc. If you want artificial heat, go feel the radiant heat in a solar farm at peak operation. Damns destroy land and water ecosystems and have an inherent danger on their own, if one busts, that’s a bad thing. Imagine the environmental impact if Hoover Dam busts?
Let’s move to other green things like hybrid or electric cars…Sound good right? There are several issues here. The electric motors produce ozone and an electromagnetic field. Ozone is a pollutant and electromagnetic fields cause cancer. The advent of hybrids is causing some alarm in this area. Also the content of a battery is highly toxic. While the battery shell is recyclable the goo inside is not and is very poisonous. Put enough of that shit in land fills and you are poluting soil, water …all kinds of shit.
My prediction is that the hybrid fad will die when people realize the cost of replacing the batteries.
The issues isn’t wanting to be needlessly dirty. The issues is when you are drawing up legislation that has large impact and cost and whose result will be next to nothing. If you are going to screw with our lives, be sure it needs to happen. The GW alarmist lack the evidence that something needs to be done and what they propose will actually do anything.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
[quote]caveman101 wrote:
so a few especially hot days in one american state compared to each other can prove disprove global warming?[/quote]
To disprove something, it must be proved first.[/quote]
I guess you were absent the day they taught science. Proving and disproving are not opposite sides of the same coin.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]caveman101 wrote:
so a few especially hot days in one american state compared to each other can prove disprove global warming?[/quote]
no, basic science and historical data disprove AGW . . . new to these threads?[/quote]
New to science?[/quote]
New to the news, data and thinking for yourself?
Remember those documentaries about human global warming destroying the polar bear species?
I’m back in school right now and taking a Geology course and my professor has a lot of interesting theories on Global Warming. He had this book that he passed around with pictures of over 200 different climate measuring sites. The sites that they record the temperatures from in order to see if the earth is progressively getting warmer, colder, or staying the same.
Well in the 200+ pictures in this publication it shows how all of these particular sites have some sort of violation. Some are right next to concrete roads now, factories, houses, quite a few industrial sized AC Units. All things that are prohibited and would drastically increase the temperature of the ambient air, thus throwing all the readings out of order. It was pretty interesting to see all this documentation on improper readings and how they effect the way scientists and researchers perceive global warming.
.greg.
[quote]gregron wrote:
I’m back in school right now and taking a Geology course and my professor has a lot of interesting theories on Global Warming. He had this book that he passed around with pictures of over 200 different climate measuring sites. The sites that they record the temperatures from in order to see if the earth is progressively getting warmer, colder, or staying the same.
Well in the 200+ pictures in this publication it shows how all of these particular sites have some sort of violation. Some are right next to concrete roads now, factories, houses, quite a few industrial sized AC Units. All things that are prohibited and would drastically increase the temperature of the ambient air, thus throwing all the readings out of order. It was pretty interesting to see all this documentation on improper readings and how they effect the way scientists and researchers perceive global warming.
.greg.[/quote]
Did you see the one where the site was in an active volcano?