[quote]pittbulll wrote:
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/07/29/3465442/whitehouse-blasts-inhofe-on-climate/[/quote]
Inhofe shows more reason than the blind followers.
Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warming
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]doogie wrote:
Antartic Ice Cap growing[/quote]
Of course, the ice cap is growing. Global warming causes prostate cancer and soggy Froot Loops so why wouldn’t it cause an increase in the amount of Arctic ice?
Correction for Doogie: It’s the Arctic cap.
[/quote]
Very interesting article concerning the growing accessibility to one of the earth’s most resource rich and strategically vital regions.
http://m.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139456/scott-g-borgerson/the-coming-arctic-boom
Summary:
No matter what one thinks should be done about global warming, the fact is, itâ??s happening. And its effects are not all bad. In the Arctic, it is turning an impassible region into an emerging epicenter of industry and trade.
Government scientists: Higher West Coast Temps due to natural causes, not Climate Change.
A study conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Washington has concluded that warmer sea and land temperatures along the Pacific coast in North America over the past 100 years are due to weak winds–and not due to human activities or “climate change.”
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Government scientists: Higher West Coast Temps due to natural causes, not Climate Change.
A study conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Washington has concluded that warmer sea and land temperatures along the Pacific coast in North America over the past 100 years are due to weak winds–and not due to human activities or “climate change.”
At least they published it in a major journal. PNAS is kind of a big publication. The second most cited journal in science from 1999-2009, and its impact factor rating is huge.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Government scientists: Higher West Coast Temps due to natural causes, not Climate Change.
A study conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Washington has concluded that warmer sea and land temperatures along the Pacific coast in North America over the past 100 years are due to weak winds–and not due to human activities or “climate change.”
At least they published it in a major journal. PNAS is kind of a big publication. The second most cited journal in science from 1999-2009, and its impact factor rating is huge.[/quote]
It doesn’t matter, the religious fanatics will still follow blindly.
Obama is preaching Climate Change bullshit right now, in the midst of this report from the very scientists who were chosen to prove his claim.
This whole bullshit was just another way to grab money from the rich, using an infallible vehicle of “the planet will explode” to commit the robbery.
An interview with Robert Kennedy Jr. at the recent Climate March shows the Leftist hypocrisy.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
An interview with Robert Kennedy Jr. at the recent Climate March shows the Leftist hypocrisy. [/quote]
This guy is one of the biggest fuckwad assholes in all the land. I can barely stand to watch an interview with him. In fact, I can’t even make myself watch this video.[/quote]
Don’t worry Push, by the sound of his voice, it sounds like he has a few interviews left.
He sounds like Julia Childs, with one foot in the coffin. I should have picked him for my ghoul pool.
So is it now “Climate Justice”? I honestly can’t keep up with this shit.
“Climate justice is a vision to dissolve and alleviate the unequal burdens created by climate change. As a form of environmental justice, climate justice is the fair treatment of all people and freedom from discrimination with the creation of policies and projects that address climate change and the systems that create climate change and perpetuate discrimination.”
http://www.actforclimatejustice.org/about/what-is-climate-justice/
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
So is it now “Climate Justice”? I honestly can’t keep up with this shit.
“Climate justice is a vision to dissolve and alleviate the unequal burdens created by climate change. As a form of environmental justice, climate justice is the fair treatment of all people and freedom from discrimination with the creation of policies and projects that address climate change and the systems that create climate change and perpetuate discrimination.”
http://www.actforclimatejustice.org/about/what-is-climate-justice/
[/quote]
The next evolution in labeling the struggle to grab more money, to link it to civil rights violations, making it an issue similar to racism, sexism, xenophobia, and any other clap trap euphemism the Left has used.
Get ready for our asses getting handed to us on Jan 1 here in Cali, the Global Warming Law passed in 2006 will raise gas prices speculated to be between 15-75 cents per gallon.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
So is it now “Climate Justice”? I honestly can’t keep up with this shit.
“Climate justice is a vision to dissolve and alleviate the unequal burdens created by climate change. As a form of environmental justice, climate justice is the fair treatment of all people and freedom from discrimination with the creation of policies and projects that address climate change and the systems that create climate change and perpetuate discrimination.”
http://www.actforclimatejustice.org/about/what-is-climate-justice/
[/quote]
The next evolution in labeling the struggle to grab more money, to link it to civil rights violations, making it an issue similar to racism, sexism, xenophobia, and any other clap trap euphemism the Left has used.
Get ready for our asses getting handed to us on Jan 1 here in Cali, the Global Warming Law passed in 2006 will raise gas prices speculated to be between 15-75 cents per gallon.
[/quote]
Yeah those idiots. AB 32 is a damn joke. The average family here will end up paying an additional $2,500 by 2020. CA is expected to lose an additional 262,000 jobs, 5.6 percent of the gross state product, and $7.4 BILLION through decreased annual state and local tax revenues as a result. Idiots.
These stats were from a study that were based on more conservative estimates, suggesting that expected costs could actually range much higher.
Only in California. Where common sense isn’t common.
Plastic bags are now illegal in CA.
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Has there been a single man-made global warming hypothesis that has become a scientific theory or law?[/quote]
The vast majority of climatologists believe that there is quite a bit of evidence supporting global climate change. Do you recognize the theory of evolution?
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Has there been a single man-made global warming hypothesis that has become a scientific theory or law?[/quote]
The vast majority of climatologists believe that there is quite a bit of evidence supporting global climate change. Do you recognize the theory of evolution?[/quote]
Extensive satellite data shows there has been no global warming, at all, for 216 months.
The “great pause” was not only not predicted, but is completely incomparable with the stupid theory.
Remember, the “consensus” was that ulcers were caused by stress. Thanks to one doctor who was laughed at until he gave himself ulcers by taking a certain bacteria in a pill, we now know they are caused by infection.
The reason the lie continues to be told is the global warming lie is a great way for certain groups to get rich using tax money and gullible people.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Has there been a single man-made global warming hypothesis that has become a scientific theory or law?[/quote]
The vast majority of climatologists believe that there is quite a bit of evidence supporting global climate change. Do you recognize the theory of evolution?[/quote]
Influenced by humans or nature?
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Has there been a single man-made global warming hypothesis that has become a scientific theory or law?[/quote]
The vast majority of climatologists believe that there is quite a bit of evidence supporting global climate change. Do you recognize the theory of evolution?[/quote]
Influenced by humans or nature?[/quote]
Anthropocentric.
What a bunch of hippy dippy liberals.
Pentagon Signals Security Risks of Climate Change
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Has there been a single man-made global warming hypothesis that has become a scientific theory or law?[/quote]
The vast majority of climatologists believe that there is quite a bit of evidence supporting global climate change. Do you recognize the theory of evolution?[/quote]
Since when does a desire for funding equate theory? No one disputes the climate can and does change over time. I have seen little to no scientific evidence (not speculation or biased computer models) that humans have caused any irreversible negative impact on the global climate through the use of fossil fuels. The mere fact alarmists have continually lied about the Earth warming when instead it has been cooling for close to 20 years tells anyone all they need to know about this poppycock.
Do I believe that species adapt and change according to their environment? Yes. Do I believe all life evolved from a single-celled organism? No. More power to you if you choose to believe you are nothing more than a talking monkey.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
What a bunch of hippy dippy liberals.
Pentagon Signals Security Risks of Climate Change
One would think a lot of the food shortages could be mitigated by stopping the practice of using food as a fuel additive as well as stopping the practice of paying farmers to not grow crops.
I guess the Pentagon hasn’t heard that it’s been over nine years since a hurricane came ashore the U.S. Sept 1st also marked the first time in almost 70 years where there were no tropical storms anywhere in the world.
Wonder if the Pentagon would stoop so low as to ask for more funding for combating imaginary threats?