99% once said the earth was flat.....
you might try telling some of the pacific islanders that their islands are not going under and see if they believe you
99% once said the earth was flat.....
you might try telling some of the pacific islanders that their islands are not going under and see if they believe you
There are at least 1000 that don't agree with the "consensus".
http://real-agenda.com/2010/12/10/1000-scientists-dissent-over-anthropogenic-warming/
what? believe me about what don?
that their islands are going under water
however, i appeared to have missed the other point that mankind is responsible for the rise in CO2 that is assisting global warming which i tend to accept
we are pumping huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere and some are claiming that that has no effect, i find that difficult to accept
Most are not claiming that there is no effect rather that the influence on weather and climate is grossly exaggerated.
Bravo, you retard, you have never pwned me even once. WTF are you talking about?
To prove how stupid you are, you thanked Tom's post, where he admitted posting the wrong links, the ones that prove MY case.
Poor Blabo.
this don....
One would think that the fact that 99% of climatologists accept mankind's role in global warming would be sufficient for even the most feeble of minds. I guess not. This will be a losing issue for them, however, because the results are tangible. I just hope people wake up before it's too late.
99% once said the earth was flat.....
Most are not claiming that there is no effect rather that the influence on weather and climate is grossly exaggerated.
Good grief.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
"The U.S. Global Change Research Program reported in June, 2009 that: 'Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal.
The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases.
These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with important contributions from the clearing of forests, agricultural practices, and other activities.'
The report, which is about the effects that climate change is having in the United States, also says: 'Climate-related changes have already been observed globally and in the United States. These include increases in air and water temperatures, reduced frost days, increased frequency and intensity of heavy downpours, a rise in sea level, and reduced snow cover, glaciers, permafrost, and sea ice. A longer ice-free period on lakes and rivers, lengthening of the growing season, and increased water vapor in the atmosphere have also been observed. Over the past 30 years, temperatures have risen faster in winter than in any other season, with average winter temperatures in the Midwest and northern Great Plains increasing more than 7°F. Some of the changes have been faster than previous assessments had suggested.'"
Furthermore,
"In 2004, the intergovernmental Arctic Council and the non-governmental International Arctic Science Committee released the synthesis report of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment: 'Climate conditions in the past provide evidence that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are associated with rising global temperatures. Human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas), and secondarily the clearing of land, have increased the concentration of carbon dioxide, methane, and other heat-trapping ("greenhouse") gases in the atmosphere...There is international scientific consensus that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.'"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Scientific_consensus
the deniers we will have with us always as they have an axe to grind and are paid to deny by those producing the CO2
the deniers we will have with us always as they have an axe to grind and are paid to deny by those producing the CO2
I am afraid that is one of those canards that is bandied around without being subjected to analysis by many.
It is because the global warming fear mongers always try to tell us who is 'qualified' to have an opinion on the matter. You see if someone disagrees, then their field of expertise matters. If someone agrees then their specific field of expertise is meaningless. They have no comprehension that someone with a statistical background is capable of seeing the errors in the computer modeling.
I guy like you wouldn't bother with something published by Forbes would you?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/petergle...-climate-data/
Obviously you haven't heard about the controversy surrounding Peter Gleick.
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/2...cuments-education-heartland-pacific-institute
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/0728/Vital-ocean-phytoplankton-a-casualty-of-global-warming
A new study suggests that a global rise in ocean temperatures has cut the number of phytoplankton, which are the bedrock of the food chain, by 40 percent since 1950. Other scientists link the rise in ocean temperatures to global warming.
The foundation of the ocean food chain is eroding, and global warming is partly to blame.
Skip to next paragraphRelated stories
[h=5]Climate change messes with the food chain[/h]- World’s oceans turning acidic faster than expected
- Global warming? Lake Tanganyika, world's second-deepest lake, heating up fast
That's the broad conclusion from a newly released study of a century's worth of measurements of the abundance of phytoplankton in the world's oceans.
Between 1899 and 2008, phytoplankton – microscopic, plant-like organisms in ocean surface waters – declined by roughly 1 percent of the global average per year, the study estimates. That works out to a 40 percent drop in amount of phytoplankton between 1950 and 2008, according to the study, which appears in tomorrow's issue of the journal Nature.
Beyond disruptions to the ocean food chain, such a decline would undercut the ocean's ability to take up the carbon dioxide humans have pumped into the atmosphere through increased burning of coal, oil, and gas, as well as through land-use changes, say scientists.
If the findings hold up to additional scrutiny, "that's quite remarkable," says Peter Franks, a phytoplankton ecologist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif. "If it's true, there's a lot of bad stuff going on."
Phytoplankton use sunlight to convert carbon dioxide into oxygen and into the sugars that keep the plankton alive long enough to become another creature's meal. By some estimates ocean phytoplankton are responsible for half of all the photosynthetic activity on the planet.
The trend noted in the study becomes most pronounced near the poles and in the tropics since 1950, the researchers say.
Of the factors the team considered to explain the decline, the most influential appeared to be rising sea-surface temperatures – a trend many other scientists have traced to global warming.
[h=2]More at link[/h]