2012 was the warmest year ever for the U.S.

Superfreak said:
I think we should take the $100 million+ Gore has made the last decade, along with his profits from selling Current TV, and redistribute that money to the poor.
Click to expand...

I wish we could take all his wealth and give it to all the people he's harmed.
 
Hotter, Drier, Disaster America

Are we already past the tipping point?

[SIZE=+1]Link[/SIZE]

Future generations of Americans can expect to spend 25 days a year sweltering in temperatures
above 100F with climate change on course to turn the country into a hotter, drier, and more
disaster-prone place.

WTF?
In Oklahoma, it was 115 degrees most of the last two summers.

The National Climate Assessment has provided the fullest picture to date of the real-time effects
of climate change on US life, and the most likely consequences for the future.

The 1,000-page report, the work of the more than 300 government scientists and outside experts,
was unequivocal on the human causes of climate change, and on the links between climate change
and extreme weather.

"Climate change is already affecting the American people," the draft report said. "Certain types of
weather events have become more frequent and/or intense including heat waves, heavy downpours
and in some regions floods and drought. Sea level is rising, oceans are becoming more acidic, and
glaciers and Arctic sea ice are melting."

Bart
gw-frozen-fool.jpg
 
Superfreak said:
A very valid point. However, there is a consistency issue. My point was to illustrate that it had happened several other times in the past. While I would tend to agree that the pollution of the late 1800's and early 1900's certainly would lend to the assertion you make, I would then ask why it spiked only at times and what were the other variables that caused lower temps in other years?

Weather patterns have and always will vary. The climate has, is and always will be changing. Pretending that man is somehow the primary driver is not supported by the actual data. The computer models that were shown to us in the late 90's early 2000's have been shown to be wrong. Yet the non stop fear mongering from so called 'climate scientists' (ask one of them what extra science courses they needed for this designation) continues unabated.
Click to expand...

the simple fact is that CO2 is a miniscule part of the equation that's been overstated because governments get to make all kinds of decisions where they'll be able to sell influence to the corporatists who fund their campaigns and give them insider tips to get rich. Government funding provides all the incentive to spin your theory to match CO2 to temps or whatever as long as you blame climate and humans in some way. Hansen is adjusting past temps down and current temps up in a pattern that defies random chance (as would be expected if there were no bias). It's not really a perversion of science as much as a perversion of statistics.


I'm glad I decided to understand the science. It's been fun and interesting. Makes me want to go back to school. LOL I'm much more focused on learning using the internet and computers in general.
 
Superfreak said:
A very valid point. However, there is a consistency issue. My point was to illustrate that it had happened several other times in the past. While I would tend to agree that the pollution of the late 1800's and early 1900's certainly would lend to the assertion you make, I would then ask why it spiked only at times and what were the other variables that caused lower temps in other years?

Weather patterns have and always will vary. The climate has, is and always will be changing. Pretending that man is somehow the primary driver is not supported by the actual data. The computer models that were shown to us in the late 90's early 2000's have been shown to be wrong. Yet the non stop fear mongering from so called 'climate scientists' (ask one of them what extra science courses they needed for this designation) continues unabated.
Click to expand...

Cut the crap simplefreak. Warmest year in history and just last year you were trying to tell us how the warming trend had ended. Oops, you lose.
 
I'm glad it's been warm!
Cold plays bloody murder on my ankles, feet and legs!!
Hurts more in the cold today than every break , sprain and shinsplint I ever had combined!
Global warming?
No proof?

Nonsensical belief in a fairy story!!

Is all gore the prophet in this belief system?

He prophesied rising sea levels, got paid for doing so, then spent that money on oceanfront property!!!
I think he knows something we don't know!!
 
Obama Hates America said:
Compared to what? Given the earth is hundreds of years old, don't you think it is a tad but presumptuous to think we can control the weather?
Click to expand...

Science is way over your head, sparky, best to stay out of these adult conversations.

Now move along, back to the little kids table...
 
Thing1 said:
First, I apologize. I'm not usually one to start "gotcha" threads, but I saw the headline, and wondered what the reaction would be if I just posted what I saw, without commentary, opinion, any reference to AGW or anything.

The reaction is actually exactly what I thought it would be, but I'm still surprised by it, which is weird.
Click to expand...

There is a real sadness to that weirdness. Entire species of animal life is dying or at risk.

Effects on Wildlife and Habitat
http://www.nwf.org/Wildlife/Threats-to-Wildlife/Global-Warming/Effects-on-Wildlife-and-Habitat.aspx

Amazingly, it's usually those who ignore the effects of GW who are the first ones who want to talk about God.

God?

How sad.
 
Rune said:
Cut the crap simplefreak. Warmest year in history and just last year you were trying to tell us how the warming trend had ended. Oops, you lose.
Click to expand...

Dear Rune... do you understand that the 'warmest year in history' was for a PART of the US? Not the world? Not even the entire US? Just the lower 48 states? Conveniently leaving out Alaska which was cooler and wetter? Imagine that.
 
Superfreak said:
Dear Rune... do you understand that the 'warmest year in history' was for a PART of the US? Not the world? Not even the entire US? Just the lower 48 states? Conveniently leaving out Alaska which was cooler and wetter? Imagine that.
Click to expand...


Is there any indication anywhere that the NOAA typically includes Alaska and Hawaii when doing these rankings or are you just conveniently pretending that the NOAA did something wrong?
 
Superfreak said:
http://drtimball.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Polar-Bear2.pdf
Click to expand...

Sorry .. I'll stick with what the Wildlife Federation says about the effects on animal life.

This is as much about spirituality as it is about science.

If you had a spiritual and conscious connection to Nature and felt a responsibility to it .. you would want to err on the side of caution. Money and profit would not enter into the equation. You would not be looking for excuses to turn a blind eye to the evidence.

Everyone does not have that connection to Nature and life. I understand that.

My point is that their apathy to Nature is sad to me .. and that such people can't tell me a damn thing about "God."
 
Dungheap said:
Is there any indication anywhere that the NOAA typically includes Alaska and Hawaii when doing these rankings or are you just conveniently pretending that the NOAA did something wrong?
Click to expand...

I am saying that to proclaim that warming has resumed for the globe based on NOAA's lower 48 states is nothing short of absurd. I also stating that you are the same idiot you have always been.
 
blackascoal said:
Sorry .. I'll stick with what the Wildlife Federation says about the effects on animal life.

This is as much about spirituality as it is about science.
Click to expand...

Why? Because they say what you want to hear? and no... this is all about the pseudo science and the lies being spread to propagate a myth.

If you had a spiritual and conscious connection to Nature and felt a responsibility to it .. you would want to err on the side of caution. Money and profit would not enter into the equation. You would not be looking for excuses to turn a blind eye to the evidence.
Click to expand...

I have a very spiritual connection to nature. Which is why I stand up against those that would do harm to the cause by spreading one falsehood after another. Those falsehoods turn people off once they learn they were lied to and it makes it that much harder to convince the masses of the real problems we face.

The very fact that it is you that turned your eye and immediately spoke of the spirituality is very telling. The evidence does not back what the fear mongers would have you believe.

Everyone does not have that connection to Nature and life. I understand that.
Click to expand...

That is true, not everyone does. Some simply proclaim they do. I choose to live in Colorado because of its nature. Because I love to hike, ski, ride, raft, climb etc... there is nothing better than a hike up a fourteener, sitting on top and looking out at the world around you. I believe we should do everything in our power to limit air, land and water pollution. But this nonsense about CO2 is nothing but a distraction by fear mongers who wish to further their own cause and line their own pockets.

My point is that their apathy to Nature is sad to me .. and that such people can't tell me a damn thing about "God."
Click to expand...

I would agree on the first part, I am agnostic and really don't care about God one way or the other.
 
Superfreak said:
I am saying that to proclaim that warming has resumed for the globe based on NOAA's lower 48 states is nothing short of absurd. I also stating that you are the same idiot you have always been.
Click to expand...


But that's not what you said. You accused the NOAA of cherry-picking data. So, I guess the answer is no.
 
Superfreak said:
Why? Because they say what you want to hear? and no... this is all about the pseudo science and the lies being spread to propagate a myth.



I have a very spiritual connection to nature. Which is why I stand up against those that would do harm to the cause by spreading one falsehood after another. Those falsehoods turn people off once they learn they were lied to and it makes it that much harder to convince the masses of the real problems we face.

The very fact that it is you that turned your eye and immediately spoke of the spirituality is very telling. The evidence does not back what the fear mongers would have you believe.



That is true, not everyone does. Some simply proclaim they do. I choose to live in Colorado because of its nature. Because I love to hike, ski, ride, raft, climb etc... there is nothing better than a hike up a fourteener, sitting on top and looking out at the world around you. I believe we should do everything in our power to limit air, land and water pollution. But this nonsense about CO2 is nothing but a distraction by fear mongers who wish to further their own cause and line their own pockets.



I would agree on the first part, I am agnostic and really don't care about God one way or the other.
Click to expand...

I have no interest in arguing the science or getting you to see what you won't.

As I've said, anyone who has a spiritual connection to Nature would choose to err on the side of caution. But you want to protect Nature from people who choose caution and prevention?

There would simply be no point to us discussing this. No offense intended.
 
Dungheap said:
But that's not what you said. You accused the NOAA of cherry-picking data. So, I guess the answer is no.
Click to expand...

this is what I stated:

Dear Rune... do you understand that the 'warmest year in history' was for a PART of the US? Not the world? Not even the entire US? Just the lower 48 states? Conveniently leaving out Alaska which was cooler and wetter? Imagine that.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what the NOAA report was about. The lower 48 states. Again... it is absurd to proclaim the global warming is back on by a report of one nation.

Now... run along and be an idiot elsewhere.
 
blackascoal said:
I have no interest in arguing the science or getting you to see what you won't.
Click to expand...

LMAO... that is because the science is not in agreement with you. That is what you choose not to see.

As I've said, anyone who has a spiritual connection to Nature would choose to err on the side of caution. But you want to protect Nature from people who choose caution and prevention?
Click to expand...

As I said... anyone who proclaims to have a spiritual connection to nature would call out those that propagate lies that will in the end hurt the cause of protecting the environment.

There would simply be no point to us discussing this. No offense intended.
Click to expand...

I understand. You are beholden to ideology over fact. No worries... many get duped into such a line of thinking. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top