New Study Indicates Gulf Stream Shutting Down Due to Global Warming

Why am I skeptical about education and science?

Because the educated crowd has produced failure after failure in government, social, and economic policies that have led to gigantic devastation.


How is science and government and economics connected you ask?

Because it takes big money to produce and sell a scientific theory to people that might have a vested interest in the outcome of scientific research.

Its been happening for centuries.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Lots of money made and still to make in the climate change theory.

Could Fukushima radiation and the oil spill in the gulf be to blame?

Unfortunately I was living in Miami at the time didn't get to enjoy it I guess my passion are hurricanes I love them I drove through a couple it was a rush.

Now that I'm in the west coast we probably won't be hit by one I have that luck every where I go they dissapate before the hit land sorry l.. reply to: hounddoghowlie

a reply to: CharlesT

Well, you expected this so here is just a little skepticism.

Why I am a Climate Change Skeptic

[Editor’s Note: Patrick Moore, Ph.D., has been a leader in international environmentalism for more than 40 years. He cofounded Greenpeace and currently serves as chair of Allow Golden Rice.

Patrick Moore lied about being a co-founder of Greenpeace and is a known paid shill for Heartland. If you insist on taking his word that is fine but below is a piece of evidence showing he is lying about his credentials at the very least, but just maybe he has better morals on his other claims.

a reply to: LOSTinAMERICA

No but if you have some extra cash I'll say yes if it makes you feel better. Gotta love that carbon cash got enough carbon you have DIAMONDS!!

a reply to: Kali74

Europe tried a carbon credit scheme some years back and the speculators and financial bandits made a fortune on it. They robbed Europe blind. But that is all this man made carbon based global warming scheme is anyway. Financial opportunity to get filthy rich and redistribute wealth. Don't get mad at me and try to convince me otherwise because it wont change my mind and will only frustrate you in the trying.

originally posted by: mikell
a reply to: LOSTinAMERICA

No but if you have some extra cash I'll say yes if it makes you feel better. Gotta love that carbon cash got enough carbon you have DIAMONDS!!

You might have me messed up with someone else. I hope the world ends. Get rid of the fleas so the Earth can terraform this son of a bitch.

originally posted by: LOSTinAMERICA
Could Fukushima radiation and the oil spill in the gulf be to blame?

According to this study, the weakening trend began around 1970.

a reply to: CharlesT

Yeah there's already a whole ATS thread for that:

Co-founder of Greenpeace: Why I am a Climate Change Skeptic

Patrick Moore is not a reliable source of information.

originally posted by: mc_squared

originally posted by: LOSTinAMERICA
Could Fukushima radiation and the oil spill in the gulf be to blame?

According to this study, the weakening trend began around 1970.

Good deal. That's one conspiracy I can let go of. The next one is that it isn't really our fault. That means the cycle of things are going to get worse before they get better. I see an ice age brewing. Buy trigger finger mittens and micky mouse boots!

a reply to: mc_squared

i am more in the camp of "lets focus on the things we are certain on, like mercury in the fish and corexit gulf shrimp, and see if we can improve the entire ecosystem in the process".

But that is less relevant.

It is a great field of study, with or without the fear and denial. Were it to have been less politicized it would have been much more easily studied (and received).

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
Meanwhile east coast USA will be warmer and wetter.

After this winter in the Boston area, I can deal with that.

a reply to: mc_squared

Great OP and great work. Thanks much. ...but I'm with BFFTexan - doesn't the slowdown and cooling, esp of the Labrador sea predict a mini-ice age there?


F&S&

a reply to: Grimpachi

Although I have no idea about the hand written scrawl that has no signature or name anywhere on it, I did a little research and found that you are most likely correct about Patrick Moore. It sticks in the craw to have to admit my fallibility but I stand enlightened about Patric Moore and relent to your challenge.

Better late than never so I'll back up and edit my post. OK?

Wait a bloody minute here. I have seen this play out before.

The Day After Tomorrow.

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: Grimpachi

Although I have no idea about the hand written scrawl that has no signature or name anywhere on it, I did a little research and found that you are most likely correct about Patrick Moore. It sticks in the craw to have to admit my fallibility but I stand enlightened about Patric Moore and relent to your challenge.

Better late than never so I'll back up and edit my post. OK?

Holy #. Sorry I'm just flabbergasted to see someone actually say something like this. It's very rare around here. I'd shake your hand if I could.

The rest of the letter (with signature) is here for what it's worth: Who Founded Greenpeace? Not Patrick Moore.

But that's awesome to see someone actually look at the evidence objectively, instead of pick a conclusion first and then only look for things that fit into it. Please accept a big fat star for denying ignorance

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: Grimpachi

Although I have no idea about the hand written scrawl that has no signature or name anywhere on it, I did a little research and found that you are most likely correct about Patrick Moore. It sticks in the craw to have to admit my fallibility but I stand enlightened about Patric Moore and relent to your challenge.

Better late than never so I'll back up and edit my post. OK?

Kudo's that is very reasonable of you. It took me off guard a bit.


It gets hard with all the information available today staying on top of which are credible and which arn't.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: mc_squared

i am more in the camp of "lets focus on the things we are certain on, like mercury in the fish and corexit gulf shrimp, and see if we can improve the entire ecosystem in the process".

That's fair enough. I think the fact that the science on climate change has become politicized though isn't really the science's fault - and there is still a lot of objective evidence you can look at without having to wade through the political muck.

For example I would recommend simply reading up on the history a bit. This link is awesome: The Discovery of Global Warming

It goes back 200 years before anyone had heard of a computer model or a carbon credit, and there's a lot of axiomatic fundamentals in there that really help with the politico mumbo jumbo later on