Global Warming is not only NOT a hoax, but it is about 10,000 times worst than your worst nightmare.

Originally posted by loner007
reply to post by The_Liberator

 

I told you to forget about educating the masses.

Some keep saying the same old drivel that has been debunked or proven wrong. People will try to twist what you say saying earth goes through cold and warm periods (I think they must think we are thick that we dont know that....). They fail to understand Earth has a dynamic system to help stop runaway warming and mans activities have stopped that from happening etc. AS i said before just sit back and enjoy the ride.

Yes, I sniped you. Just wanted to express something about sitting back and eat a twinkie stance. This is one hell of a deadly situation that will/is occuring, and though I am a bit on the fence about who to point a finger at. I dont think many people can discredit environmental change that is occuring.

Problem is there is no solution, nobody understands the effect it will have on what area of where. Heck yesterday and for the past 4 days here in Northern Italy we just witnessed massive flooding, while my family back in Texas are witnessing zero to minimum rainfall. Potential to drown, starve, get crushed, burn, etc. etc. have risen in percentage by a large amount. Keep an eye out!

Originally posted by Faiol
I am smart, but I would say I really did not waste my time studying it ... do you know why? Because to this day, nobody was able to present enough evidences to prove either side, and since I am smart, thats enough for me to understand that nobody really knows exactly whats happening

but I agree that we need to try to do something, not just because of global warming, but really, we are poising not only nature but ourselves


BUT, if you stop to think that the "elite" (al gore and his friends) want to implement a flawed politic to save the planet, in a way that he and his friends can become a little more billionaire (?? why would he want more money??) - you will realize that nothing makes sense! why would someone implement a politic that would KILL the planet if his statements about global warming are true

so, thought logic, I did reach to this sentence = (al gore is stupid or global warming is a hoax or global warming cant be stopped and we are all domed)

Erm your logic is flawed. You have made the assumption that al gore is only it in for the money (it may be a fact! but we don;t know hence its an assumption). The most money is to be made promoting fossil fuel consumption ie maintaining the status quo hence big oil backed anti GW campaigns. You forget what the OP has correctly stated that 97% of scientists (who I suspect are NOT billionaires) who support man made GW and the 3% who don't and differ in the explanation for the causes of GW!!

Global warming is not a hoax that's simply a headline style attempt to distract the unknowledgable masses. I have a met a few who regurgitate the "its a hoax" message but when asked can't provide the detail as to why it's a hoax ie they fell for headline !!!!

Global warming can possibly be reversed. Even if it can't we can mitigate the worst affects by doing something. Ironically enough, the measures required would make the world a cleaner healthier place to live. So even if there is no global warming its the correct thing to . A win - win.......but people will have to change their polluting selfish lifestyles....oh dear....

If I could stick my oar in here....

It doesn't matter what is the cause of climate change at this point. To deny it is happening is to deny history itself. Of course Climate change is happening, and that I dare say we humans have some impact into the environment.

However and I want to be very clear.

Nothing that we do as in the little people such as you and me can make a difference. It is not our fault that the civilisation we inhabit is set up the way it is. We are unfortunately powerless to prevent the governments and corporations making their choices.

An example taken from earlier about the packaging issues we have and recycling. How can the little people be blamed for wastage when the waste comes from manufacturing and the packaging that our products come in.

Another example is the power guilt trip we are all placed under. Switch that light out you power hog!! Well actually the human race naturally grows in power consumption needs... It is not the little peoples fault that the power generation choices are the ones that damage the environment.

And yet another example of this and was highlighted in the video on the OP, "don't eat beef cause effectively they fart a lot and we have to cut down the trees to house them" it is not our fault that the government won't invest in other ways of managing livestock that do not have such a large impact on the global environment.

Just as a conscious objector such as a vegetarian cannot stop animals being culled for food, neither can we the little people stop any of the above by avoiding the things that cause the damage.

It is the People in privileged positions that are able to do something about it. The Governments and the Corporations and I’m afraid I have some very bad news for you.

Those people couldn't give a damn about you and your family and if the world were to fry, it is not an issue for them, because they have the money and power to ensure that at least they and their of offspring will survive.

We talk about global depopulation; this is it ladies and gentlemen. They don't need to send viruses or to poison us with chemicals. All they have to do is nothing... No action against what is happening and it's goodbye the little people and hello world domination...

Eugenics at its core and allowing Georgia cornerstones to be accomplished.

6 Degrees and its game over.... Well... game over for us the little people anyway.

Korg.

reply to post by mc_squared

Now also consider this - a lot of the more mathematically challenged skeptical pundits will try to tell you that because CO2's effect is based on a logarithmic scale, increasing it's concentration will have little effect. But what this actually means is that CO2's contribution to climate change is much more relevant in terms of it's relative concentration rather than it's absolute. So this is why you hear so much scientific talk centered around a "CO2 doubling" (which our current emissions paths are well on their way to surpassing, let alone achieving).

That's a rather ham-handed presentation of CO2's logarithmic effect. Increasing CO2 does have a progressively weaker radiative forcing response, and that is what it means without being needlessly esoteric or obfuscating and this is something that the IPCC even acknowledges, there logarithmic equation for CO2 and CH4 is relevant here, Wiki states that the "relationship between carbon dioxide and radiative forcing is logarithmic so that increased concentrations have a progressively smaller warming effect". I have no argument with Schwarzchild equation on which it is based. Anyway, you know as well as I do that most of the predicted warming (around 3C) comes from feedback factors which make any discussion on CO2's potential warming capabilities essentially meaningless. And the "centered talk" isn't really about CO2 doubling but about the magnitude of feedbacks.

(which our current emissions paths are well on their way to surpassing, let alone achieving).

You sure that the purported 130ppm increase in CO2 since the industrial-revolution is anthropogenically-derived? I have two reasons you might want to consider that cast doubt on this notion. This following graph on C14 shows an exponential decay curve of approximately 10 years, from around 1963 in the graph to the mid 70's, after the cessation of nuclear testing in the early 1960's. As you can see the extra C14 produced from nuclear testing does not decay to zero, but rather to the background levels of C14, which are created naturally by cosmic ray bombardment in the stratosphere from supernovas. Given this, how could anthropogenic CO2 possibly have accumulated over 70 years as the IPCC postulates since it has an atmospheric-lifetime of about ten years? C14 shouldn't behave differently to C12 or C13. Secondly, the decrease in C13 in the atmosphere said to be the signature of anthropogenic CO2 is similar to the signature from vegetation decay. As Spencer points out here "a change in ocean biological activity (or vegetation on land) has a similar signature, so the C13 change is not a unique signature of fossil fuel source. Are we really sure that all of the atmospheric increase in CO2 is from humanity's emissions? After all, the natural sources and sinks of CO2 are about 20 times the anthropogenic source, so all it would take is a small imbalance in the natural flows to rival the anthropogenic source".

That might be the first correct thing you've ever said on this topic - congrats.

How typically condescending of you.

Originally posted by Korg Trinity
If I could stick my oar in here....

Of course Climate change is happening, and that I dare say we humans have some impact into the environment.

Climate change is undeniable and at the very least human activity will be a contributory factor may be even the factor that pushes the climate over a tipping point, carbon taxation is not only not an answer it is such an obvious money making scam that it tarnishes the entire debate and gives deniers easy ammo in the persuasion game.

"It's The End Of The World As We Know It" Lyrics

OMG 10,000 times worst than your worst nightmare RUNNNNNNNNN 2 late.....dam

1. If there is a increase in CO2, well it has happened b4 and these levels will always go up and down.
2. where is the heat source....... yep u guessed it THE SUN which also goes through cycles.
3. The_Liberator what car do you drive, is ur PC powered by what....yep fossil fuel. Better stop breathing because you exhale.....yep CO2 and when you die and your body decomposes like everything else on this planet, once again CO f---ing 2.
4. The ocean is enormous you know how long it takes 2 warm up....... f---ing long time, and what happened long time ago like a period of warming, the effects are felt now.

I could carry on and link/reference this but we still know S__T about what is all happening around us. In the 70's we where going to have an ice age, and now the world is going to boil like a egg...uuhhmm lol lol lol if u belief that btw.

So The_Liberator, be glad that there people out there who not belief that the Earth is gonna boil like an egg, whit no opposition party what do you get.......yep Nazi dictators. Don't judge for what others belief in and look at your self to make this a better world.

Yes our planet's atmosphere is being changed on purpose and I suspect, not by human design.

People may flame and ridicule me as crazy, but I've done my job I was sent here to do.

You have all been warned.

Watch the cheesy movie, "The Arrival" and read David Jacob's book, "The Threat".

The taking of planet Earth will be noted in Galactic News Journals as "like taking candy from a spoiled, arrogant and blind baby".

No big war machines, particle beams or Star Wars Invasions...............but a quiet, subversive assimilation, retinkering (yet again) of our DNA and than, when enough of our DNA has been assimilated and there is a majority of the "new human", the final coup de grace, the final changing over of our very atmosphere to allow those "hybrids" to exist and flourish.

Perhaps in retrospect, if by chance this change over from what is now humanity to future human, we lose our ape like aggression, our taste for warfare and blood, perhaps it will be for the better.

But, this may leave mankind with little or no "emotional depth". We will have lost that special "something" that made us human.

Peace.

another problem is the almost untalked about coal mine fires...
en.wikipedia.org...
thousands of which burn around the clock... even if humans stopped
burning hydrocarbons completely, these fires will/can burn for thousands of years!

the problem is some types of coal burn spontaneously, and water can actually
start coal burning, so trying to put coal fires out with water oftentimes makes matters worse.
of course, most coal mine fires are burning in China, where poor environmental/digging methods
have caused thousands of fires to start...

[[[...China's coal fires, which consume an estimated 20 – 200 million tons of coal a year, make up as much as 1 percent of the global carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels]]]

like melting permafrost, these fires create a near permanent co2 (methane) emission baseline.

Originally posted by Thepreye

Originally posted by Korg Trinity
If I could stick my oar in here....

Of course Climate change is happening, and that I dare say we humans have some impact into the environment.

Climate change is undeniable and at the very least human activity will be a contributory factor may be even the factor that pushes the climate over a tipping point, carbon taxation is not only not an answer it is such an obvious money making scam that it tarnishes the entire debate and gives deniers easy ammo in the persuasion game.

I totally agree. But again as I believe the governments and corporations don't want things to get better, it's more than likely a measure that not only generates wealth but also creates an eerie atmosphere of disbelief and distrust that it's actually happening.

I'm honestly and truthfully shocked that there are people out there that are fighting for whom to place the blame.... And I’m absolutely flabbergasted that there are people out there actually deny the existence of climate change (heads in the sand??)

I'm struggling to look my children in the eye and smile, knowing what they are going to have to go through...

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity

And I’m absolutely flabbergasted that there are people out there actually deny the existence of climate change (heads in the sand??)

No-one denies climate change, Korg, the climate changes all the time.

reply to post by unityemissions

If you really want us to take your claims seriously don't show us somebody else's video. SHOW US YOUR RESEARCH.
Nearly all of the scientific community?
If you expect us to take your claims seriously DO NOT distort the facts. The scientific community is fairly divided.
What most people reject isn't the fact that the whole solar system is being warmed up, nor the many problems that humanity has caused resulting in our poisoning of the biosphere. WE KNOW THE BIOSPHERE IS STUFFED!
What many reject is the cure that is being proposed. A GLOBAL CARBON TAX will not fix the problems.
The very same people who propose this tax are aware of the hidden technology that exists and they know that if this technology was exposed to the world we could fix the problems within 5 years, not completely but it would claw us back from the tipping point. Coal and oil MUST GO but they refuse to deal with it and instead claim that this bull# carbon tax will save us, it won't it will destroy economies.

Originally posted by Nathan-D
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

And I’m absolutely flabbergasted that there are people out there actually deny the existence of climate change (heads in the sand??)

No-one denies climate change, Korg, the climate changes all the time.

I read the entire thread and there are those that are saying that Climate Change is not happening, or am I miss reading them?

Anyway, the point is there is nothing we the little people can do about it. It's in the hands of those whom control the world, and they don't shait!

Korg.

Originally posted by malcr
Erm your logic is flawed. You have made the assumption that al gore is only it in for the money (it may be a fact! but we don;t know hence its an assumption). The most money is to be made promoting fossil fuel consumption ie maintaining the status quo hence big oil backed anti GW campaigns. You forget what the OP has correctly stated that 97% of scientists (who I suspect are NOT billionaires) who support man made GW and the 3% who don't and differ in the explanation for the causes of GW!!

Global warming can possibly be reversed. Even if it can't we can mitigate the worst affects by doing something. Ironically enough, the measures required would make the world a cleaner healthier place to live. So even if there is no global warming its the correct thing to

. A win - win.......but people will have to change their polluting selfish lifestyles....oh dear....

Al Gores "new" sea side resort next to a rapidly rising ocean might give a clue on what he really think is going to happen.

Your statement that most money is made on promoting fossil fuel consumption is simply hilarious. Do you actually think that people need to be pursaded to use fossil fuel all the time there is no actual alternative.

Given the IPCC calculations on the effects of CO2, a reversal would in fact require a shut down of the global economy for about 80 years. That is what it takes to bring down the CO2 concentrations to pre-industrial levels. Anyone who thinks that a small change in personal lifestyle will have any effect at all are deluding themselves.

There are a lot of things we can do to make the world cleaner and healthier, and I, for one, am all for it. CO2 on the other hand is not a pollutant. In fact we are only about 200 ppm above the level where photosyntesis is severly impaired. Now that would be a real catastrophe.

Originally posted by The_Liberator

See that big red fiery thing in the sky? Look up once in a while and you may notice it (unless you too are here in Ireland where it’s quite rare). Well, that’s the thing that’s causing solar climate change.

False.

www.skepticalscience.com...

Watch the video I posted in this thread and educate yourself before spouting uninformed opinions. If you don't know what you are talking about, you are not entitled to an opinion on the matter.

I've already put the whois information to that domain. If you accept a crappy cartoonist (not a scientist) as relavent to your 'argument', you have to accept Watts too.