[quote]csulli wrote:
Seriously nobody is gonna weigh in on this? I can understand if you need some time since this wasn’t one of the 99 things for which that site gave you a convenient little quip.
Won’t anybody play with me?[/quote]
Could you link to the paper directly (apologies if I missed it before) or at least the data set this line was fit from?
As with my last post, all these similar elaborate charts, graphs, and CIA Reports, and Scientific ‘‘consensus’’ alarms
were a ‘‘certainty’’ that we were on a collision course with an ‘‘Ice Age’’ within 20 years was written in a book called
‘‘The Coming Ice Age’’…I still have that old book as a novelty now.
Here is PROOF these ‘‘warnings’’ go in cycles to attempt to scam every NEW generation…The Ice Age alarm in the 70’s,
and going back to the 50’s, an old ‘‘Global Warming’’ scare video, generational cycles of scares, that’s the truth…cycles of scares,
and it’s about the ultimate goal…Control over your life.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I used to like snowboarding, so I thought this was relevant. I say used to because Tahoe has seen a significant drop in snow cover the last ten years and I simply don’t have the time to go up there to ride when all I’m going to be doing is cruising down some slushy blown snow. I can barely even ride on any fresh corduroy up there anymore, let alone some real deep pow-pow.[/quote]
All that really means is that you are a spoiled powder snob.
Come on over to the east where we shred on plates of ice from December to March.
Hahaha! I see DB has quite a lot of lag on his posts. That’s too bad. DB look at my most recent post and let me know what you think. I posted it before all your posts with the graphs showed up. You basically just posted the hockey stick graph a bunch of times. I preemptively explained why that doesn’t help your case.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
C’mon Pitttttbullllll, seriously man, you need to step away. Just back up and slip away unnoticed.[/quote]
PLZZZZZZZZ I am supposed to listen to these pseudo Scientists ? A world full of people that know everything
[quote]csulli wrote:
I delved extremely deeply into the subject of anthropogenic global warming in college. I was a stat major, and I noticed an extreme amount of bullshit in pretty much every study presented at the time.
I just want followers of this thread to look at this picture and tell me what you see.[/quote]
I would have to wonder if different atmospheric gases of higher percentage of total content or with different thermal properties would be a more powerful factor in atmospheric temperature change.
A gas like maybe argon (just off of the top of my head).
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
More than once? As in twice, in my entire posting history on this site. Wow. It was literally the first thing that popped up when I did a Google search for a completely unrelated topic and happened to have an article about that study linked to it. Like I said, it’s a study that is being reported in literally every media source out there right now.[/quote]
More than once - as in twice in the last few days.
You didn’t say you didn’t like the article. My point was merely to call out your hypocrisy. Have you found anything in any peer reviewed publication calling out the fraud and lies perpetrated by East Anglia University’s CRU?
I think cyclical natural occurrences have far more impact on the global climate than everything all the humans who have ever existed on the planet earth could ever hope to do wrt destroying the earth. The impact of the human being on this planet is grotesquely over estimated.
AGW is a lie. It was a lie when they told us we were all going to freeze to death. It was a lie when they said North America would once again be covered by glacial ice. It is a lie now, and has been proven to be - at the very least - a scam.
Your little graphs only show a small change in temperature over an even small time sample. It would be nice to see a little intellectual honesty from the AGW crowd, but all they seem capable of is science-ism. The religion of science. “97% say this is true, therefore anyone doubting 97% of the scientists are wrong and are going to destroy the earth.”
You swallow the ‘human impact model’ like a pelican swallows a fish - you never took the time to digest it. SHow me the mechanics of the model. This smells like the EAU scam all over again.
Paying a fucking carbon tax isn’t going fix the planet. You are not going to be prepared for what is coming, if indeed it is coming, by buying into Al Gore’s carbon credit scam.
Here is my position - just so you aren’t confused:
The earth is changing. It has been in a dynamic state since it was formed.
Humans have had no impact on that change beyond easily repairable impacts on local ecosystems. But no course altering impact on a global scale. None whatsoever.
The AGW crowd are progressive socialists who blame the US for every problem that has occurred since 1880. They’ve been caught cheating, lying, fudging numbers, making numbers up, and outright discussing the deception of AGW.
DBCooper what don’t you understand about rapid climate and CO2 changes being much worse before man arrived on the scene?
Scientists drill into frozen lake and glaciers and can give the readouts from thousands of years back and the science says glaciers come and go. Oceans rise in temperature and fall again. Al Gore & Michael Moore take to the liberal shill networks to tell us the sky is falling unless we stop driving cars running on fossil fuels.
F them. They’re getting paid to scare people and open avenues for the U.N. to tax countries for their energy output. This isn’t something you and your neighbors can correct by how much you drive or heat your homes. You don’t amount to squat compared to what the planet is able to do on it’s own. Why can’t you comprehend that???
[quote]drunkpig wrote:
Paying a fucking carbon tax isn’t going fix the planet. You are not going to be prepared for what is coming, if indeed it is coming, by buying into Al Gore’s carbon credit scam.
[/quote]
other than stating your opinion you stated ZERO fact . This statement would only be true if IN FACT you could prove Carbon was not the Culprit . It would make sense to tax that which does the most harm . The biggest problem I could see would be like America’s environmental policies ,it self . It could and would put some American Industries and Businesses at a price disadvantage
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
C’mon Pitttttbullllll, seriously man, you need to step away. Just back up and slip away unnoticed.[/quote]
PLZZZZZZZZ I am supposed to listen to these pseudo Scientists ? A world full of people that know everything [/quote]
They told us thirty years ago we only had perhaps ten years if things didn’t change. Jacques Cousteau, John Denver and all the kooky liberals from that era were telling us pollution would be our end and the planet was getting cooler.
Stop driving cars, pee in the dark and don’t turn on your furnace pittbull. Save yourself by being the only one that cares enough to sacrifice because obviously the opposing side will cause the planet to cease to exist.
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
C’mon Pitttttbullllll, seriously man, you need to step away. Just back up and slip away unnoticed.[/quote]
PLZZZZZZZZ I am supposed to listen to these pseudo Scientists ? A world full of people that know everything [/quote]
They told us thirty years ago we only had perhaps ten years if things didn’t change. Jacques Cousteau, John Denver and all the kooky liberals from that era were telling us pollution would be our end and the planet was getting cooler.
Stop driving cars, pee in the dark and don’t turn on your furnace pittbull. Save yourself by being the only one that cares enough to sacrifice because obviously the opposing side will cause the planet to cease to exist.
[/quote]
While some of your point are valid you still have not proved that man made Climate Change is not happening
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
Seriously nobody is gonna weigh in on this? I can understand if you need some time since this wasn’t one of the 99 things for which that site gave you a convenient little quip.
Won’t anybody play with me?[/quote]
Shows marked decline in atmospheric CO2 concentrations and decline in temperatures.
As I’ve always heard things were much worse before man ever entered the picture. The planet is not in anything other than a normal climate shift. Earth’s climate has always had fluctuations some very significant in the past. But what science doesn’t mention often to the Michael Moore’s & Rachel Maddows is the rapidity with which these changes can occur, with or without mankind.
It is the opposite of what the powers that be (government controlled agencies)continually preach at us. You could say it’s part of their liberal religion. It is something they take on faith. At their altar? Aborted babies, often in horrendous pain as we are just beginning to learn.
But please expound on your point, you obviously have more interesting things to post than what I offer.
[/quote]
The powers that be, eh? Going to play that card now? You know, given the sheer size and power of the oil industry lobby, not to mention the business community lobby in general, you’d think that they’d be able to use their powers that be to produce more than a mere 3% of the studies that take a stance on climate change on the side of anti-climate change.
Is the science community lobby or the green technology lobby so much more powerful than the business lobby, or even just the oil industry lobby, that they can get THIS much more information out there supporting their side of the issue?[/quote]
Why don’t you apply your study logic to what’s in every Joe Weider Publication and tell me anyone can make a SUPPLEMENT study and chart look the way they want. Be sure to order those testosterone boosters that up you T and HGH levels 140%!
Liberals control our universities and colleges, because nine out of ten tenured professors are liberal. We have that information, I’m not making that up.
Nine out ten journalists are liberals so who controls what goes on 90% of TV. Do the oil companies have their own cable company? Liberals own the media and have their hooks in higher education which make many of these “science” charts. Liberals currently run the government which includes NASA and everything they have an opinion on
Maybe you heard the liberals that currently run the government and have gotten themselves into some little trouble abusing power in the IRS, and controlled what stories get played such as Benghazi & the abortion horror show of Dr. Gosnell.
Also evidently your honest government decided to monitor and illegally record phone calls of associated press members in order to manipulate them.
WTF don’t you get about they can manipulate anything they want???
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
Nine out ten journalists are liberals
[/quote]
What you mean is 9 out of 10 Journalists points of view veries from your’s
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
While some of your point are valid you still have not proved that man made Climate Change is not happening [/quote]
How do you prove that something which hasn’t been proven is not happening?
The climate may in fact be changing, but the human influence has not been proven.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
Nine out ten journalists are liberals
[/quote]
What you mean is 9 out of 10 Journalists points of view veries from your’s
[/quote]
?
How about this. If 99.9% of people agree with a thing that means nothing. To think it does is a Logical Fallacy called an Appeal to the Majority. The fact is that man made Global Warming is a silly, money making hoax. I would think that Libs/Progressives would be suspicious of anything that gives the uber wealthy free reign but restricts the activities of the old and the poor the the point of starvation and winters with no heat (UK because of carbon taxes). I give them too much credit.
Here are some facts for you.
About 1000 years ago the Vikings moved to what is now called Greenland, grew crops there, and did quite well. They moved onto Northern Canada and called it Vineland from all of the lush groves of grapes they found there. After a while the climate shifted and it became too cold to surive in the wild of Canada and Vineland was abandoned. They remained in Greenland but only after switching to a 100% sea food diet. Too cold to grow crops. The climate changed and not one dollar changed hands.
Years later in the Uk about the time William Shakespeare was doing his best work, winters there were so cold horses and buggies took short cuts across the Thames that regularly froze over. Then the climate shifted and it hasn’t been cold enough to drive across the Thames since. This without one dollar changing hands.
Then we have the Piri Reis Map that accurately shows Antartica without ice, proving that man had once seen it as such. The accuracy of this map was proven by ground penetrating radar. To this you could add the accounts of the Aborigines and Polynesians whose historical records speak of visiting what is now called Antartica and interacting with the people that once lived there.
I could go on all day but the point is that the climate is effected not by your driving to work necessitating the paying Al Gore and his Rothschild bankster buddies trillions of dollars, but by that ball of fire in the sky whose output has never been constant.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
Nine out ten journalists are liberals
[/quote]
What you mean is 9 out of 10 Journalists points of view veries from your’s
[/quote]
Whether it’s a view I agree with has nothing to do with news information should be reported. Truth is truth.
I always question when a culturally diverse nation such as ours has all but one of it’s TV news channels in lock step with one another on practically every story. Makes me feel like I’m in China. That one channel is ridiculed, manipulated on other channels and talked at like it was a black man in the 1950’s south.
Now we see all the FOX news stories they were reporting when none of the other channels would touch them is deemed to matter since Barack Hussein and his communists really stepped in deep shit. Even Chris Matthews and Jon Daily don’t want to play pretend anymore.
Prove a story on FOX wrong. Prove talk radio wrong. It really isn’t whether I agree it is what is important information and that it is not omitted but given to the American public. We know CNN and PMSNBC are playing catch up now and are not happy that their own guy in the white house screwed them.
[quote]Krinks wrote:
How about this. If 99.9% of people agree with a thing that means nothing. To think it does is a Logical Fallacy called an Appeal to the Majority. The fact is that man made Global Warming is a silly, money making hoax. I would think that Libs/Progressives would be suspicious of anything that gives the uber wealthy free reign but restricts the activities of the old and the poor the the point of starvation and winters with no heat (UK because of carbon taxes). I give them too much credit.
Here are some facts for you.
About 1000 years ago the Vikings moved to what is now called Greenland, grew crops there, and did quite well. They moved onto Northern Canada and called it Vineland from all of the lush groves of grapes they found there. After a while the climate shifted and it became too cold to surive in the wild of Canada and Vineland was abandoned. They remained in Greenland but only after switching to a 100% sea food diet. Too cold to grow crops. The climate changed and not one dollar changed hands.
Years later in the Uk about the time William Shakespeare was doing his best work, winters there were so cold horses and buggies took short cuts across the Thames that regularly froze over. Then the climate shifted and it hasn’t been cold enough to drive across the Thames since. This without one dollar changing hands.
Then we have the Piri Reis Map that accurately shows Antartica without ice, proving that man had once seen it as such. The accuracy of this map was proven by ground penetrating radar. To this you could add the accounts of the Aborigines and Polynesians whose historical records speak of visiting what is now called Antartica and interacting with the people that once lived there.
I could go on all day but the point is that the climate is effected not by your driving to work necessitating the paying Al Gore and his Rothschild bankster buddies trillions of dollars, but by that ball of fire in the sky whose output has never been constant. [/quote]
Speaking to your last paragraph, I was shocked that Al Gore got such a huge pass, even by his Leftist buddies when he sold his TV network to Al Jazeera.
Speaking about that, i wonder… where are these people now ?
At Conservative Dog . I agree our society is way too partisan . Truth should be paramount
I personally feel we are very much like China , just not a s bad .
IMO FAUX News is just a partisan hack . Fanning the flames of ignorance
Another Opinion I have that is in the minority is that Obama is just like George Bush no better and by all means no WORSE . The partisan attacks , all the conspiracies detract from the TRUE PROBLEMS that both parties are guilty of . This kind of goes with the China train of thought