Even More on Glow-Bull Warming

[Tarheel]

I like this guy's idea of taking Algore and his Global Warming alarmist friends to task in court.  Then we would see some real debate over this psuedo-scientific fraud (just another excuse for another tax):

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337710,00.html

[AUTailgatingRules]

Do you actually know anyone over the age of 25 that is not a flaming liberal that actually believes all this global warming, carbon credit bullshit? 

[Tarheel]

Do you actually know anyone over the age of 25 that is not a flaming liberal that actually believes all this global warming, carbon credit bullshit? 

Unfortunately, yes, I do...and, no, they are not (all) flaming liberals...I'd say they are just gullible especially since the Main Stream Media reports this Glow-Bull warming crap as if it is fact.

[AUChizad]

Do you actually know anyone over the age of 25 that is not a flaming liberal that actually believes all this global warming, carbon credit bullshit? 

Scientists?

Dammit guys, don't make me be the resident hippie just because I'm a right-leaning moderate, which makes me the farthest left here.

This place needs real hippies to argue with.

I'm not saying everyone should be driving solar powered cars and hugging trees, I'm just saying this is hard to argue with...

[Saniflush]

Compelling!  Almost as much as this.

[AUTailgatingRules]

Oh my god, it is 1/2 degree hotter now than it was 120 yaers ago.  Holy shit we are going to fry from the inside out.  This is typical of the Libs, in order to make that chart look alarming they spread the numbers way out and use miniscule measures to make the line look like it is on a drastic up tick.  Do the same graph with 1 degree temperature variances and the line looks almost straight over the last 120 years.

You are going to have to come up with much more than this to convince me!!

Its a good thing we did away with the horse and buggy, sure was hot back in 1880.  riddle me that one batman.

[AUChizad]

I didn't say The Day After Tomorrow was accurate, and everyone should be on massive freakout mode. It's definitely gradual. If you spread out a chart with the number of PC's per household over the last 40 years just right, it would make a flat line too.

I'm just saying to act like there is no trend is denying fact. And to say that only crazy flaming liberals subscribe the idea that the climate is changing is also not true. For example, the scientists who actually devote their lives to studying and finding imperical evidence to deterimine whether or not it's happening...

[AUTailgatingRules]

We had ice ages and warming trends way back before the burning of fossil fuels.  The global temperature has always gone through cycles of cooling and warming.  To think that we can do anything to cause or stop the warming/cooling is ridiculous.  Do you blame the cavemen for the last ice age?  who is to blame for warming the atmosphere to melt said ice?

The reason we have the global warming scare right now is simple....there a ton of people making shitloads of money off it!!!!!!!!!!!!

[War Eagle!!!]

The reason we have the global warming scare right now is simple....there a ton of people making shitloads of money off it!!!!!!!!!!!!

I may believe this statement if it had more exclamation marks...

[AUChizad]

Trust me, if this board was full of hippies declaring the end is near and we all need to become vegetarians to cut down on carbon emissions and whatnot, I'd be the first to break out the Pirate chart.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here because we don't have any real liberals here to argue against those that think it's all 100% garbage based less in fact than the tooth fairy and that you have to be a barking lunatic to think it's an issue that warrants SOME concern.

[AUTailgatingRules]

Trust me, if this board was full of hippies declaring the end is near and we all need to become vegetarians to cut down on carbon emissions and whatnot, I'd be the first to break out the Pirate chart.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here because we don't have any real liberals here to argue against those that think it's all 100% garbage based less in fact than the tooth fairy and that you have to be a barking lunatic to think it's an issue that warrants SOME concern.

I will be the first to label myself as a 'barking idiot".  I'm pretty sure the crops will still grow and we can walk outside without frying for a few billion more years.

[AUChizad]

I will be the first to label myself as a 'barking idiot".  I'm pretty sure the crops will still grow and we can walk outside without frying for a few billion more years.

Reread what I said. I said you guys are the ones saying that anyone who DOES think there is SOME cause for concern are barking lunatics.

[AUTailgatingRules]

OK good, that means I don't have to wear the label.  Good to know.

[Tarheel]

...
Its a good thing we did away with the horse and buggy, sure was hot back in 1880.
...

And there was a lot more horseshit to clear up too.

As you all have guessed I really don't buy this Global Warming (or is it Global Cooling?...or Global Climate Change?) crap...especially after reading Michael Crichton's book "State of Fear" a few years back...a book that I can highly recommend on this subject.  

Meteorologists can hardly forecast what the weather will be like over a five day period...how can these same scientists speak with any kind of credibility about the weather over a 50 to 100 year cycle?  These are the same folk who predicted horrible hurricane seasons the past two years and we didn't have anything close that severe of a weather pattern.  Historically climate is cyclical...and none of these 'scientists' can explain what caused the Medieval Warming Period or the subsequent Little Ice Age other than to claim that it was a "local" phenomenon without any contrary evidence(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period).  They report this as matter of fact (a localized phenomenon) but it is plain to see that because there is no empirical data (other than what can be documented in Europe) they cannot claim that it was NOT global in nature either.  (And, yes, I know purists recoil in horror at a citation from Wikipedia...but I did anyway since I know the Auburn grads will appreciate it.)

[Tarheel]

Reread what I said. I said you guys are the ones saying that anyone who DOES think there is SOME cause for concern are barking lunatics.

I prefer using the term "Barking Moonbats"; there's also a great conservative blog by that same name.

[GarMan]

Scientists?

Dammit guys, don't make me be the resident hippie just because I'm a right-leaning moderate, which makes me the farthest left here.

Nobody's making you do anything. 

The point here is that global warming is not caused by man.  This is why we see it as “Glow-Bull” warming.  Nobody really refutes the idea that the earth is warming slightly, but logic and reason suggests that natural occurrences would be a better explanation for this phenomenon.  Are we not still recovering from the last ice age?  Has the planet not undergone several warming and cooling trends prior to the existence of man and their EVIL Industrial Age? 

Where did your chart come from?  NASA revised their warming estimates a while back which showed the trend to fall off resulting in a correction to the “hottest year on record.”  Algore, Newsweek and every other Liberal media rag and outlet claimed that it was 1998.  After the NASA correction, 1934 became the “hottest year on record.”  Your chart doesn’t show this, which leads me to believe that you have false, pre-correction information.  By the way, the global alarmists had also claimed that 5 of the 10 hottest years occurred in the last 10 years, but the NASA correction revised that number down to 3. 

Finally, look at your own chart.  If the rate of rise in global temperatures increased around the time of the Industrial Age, you and Algore might have a point by blaming man for the relatively insignificant rise in global temperatures, but there is no acceleration or even a notable increase in temperature rise as a reasonable person would expect.  I mean seriously, if more people are driving cars every year, and more cars are being produced every year, and more energy is being generated every year, and more stuff is being created every year, and so on, wouldn’t a logical reflection of this increased activity be evident in an accelerated slope or gentle parabolic curve upward? 

Download and read this for an interesting perspective on this argument...  http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2006/fireandice/FireandIce.pdf 

[Saniflush]

Fucking hippie.

[GarMan]

More fun on the topic...

Court Identifies Eleven Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/09/court-identifies-eleven-inaccuracies-al-gore-s-inconvenient-truth

[Saniflush]

Let me post those right now.  I don't want any of the hippies claiming they couldn't use the link cause it would inadvertently harm the environment or overly encumber the invention of Al Gore.

    * The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
    * The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
    * The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.
    * The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that this was not the case.
    * The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
    * The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
    * The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
    * The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
    * The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
    * The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
    * The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

[GarMan]

Another fun piece of information...

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html